Israel Folau - HIGHEST PAID PLAYER in the AFL. What a joke.

Remove this Banner Ad

As I said the study you referred to has been debunked, as has several other popular studies that have been spouted for years as proving a biological/genetic basis (e.g. Levay (INAH3) study). Another that looked promising (Spitzer) was published but in the end didn't pass the peer review process.

(1) I'm not stamping my feet and I'd rather you not characterise me as such.

(2) I'm not saying it's a choice, I'm merely reporting the words of many 'gay' people who have been brave enough to admit that it is/was a choice.

I don't think Folau bullied or bashed anyone. He merely responded to a question posed to him as honestly as he could and used as his reference the cornerstone of his faith.
He posted a crudely constructed, hatey recycled meme.
 
He posted a crudely constructed, hatey recycled meme.

If the word 'hatey' is deleted I agree wholeheartedly with what you said. I've said on a number of occasions in another thread that he could've constructed his message more tactfully, but let's be honest he's not an English Professor, he's a rugby player. How nuanced would you expect his argument to be? To be fair to him though, he didn't just post the meme he also posted the biblical passage he had in mind also.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If the word 'hatey' is deleted I agree wholeheartedly with what you said. I've said on a number of occasions in another thread that he could've constructed his message more tactfully, but let's be honest he's not an English Professor, he's a rugby player. How nuanced would you expect his argument to be? To be fair to him though, he didn't just post the meme he also posted the biblical passage he had in mind also.
If you can't get your message across without looking like a homophobic religious nutter, you should probably think more about whether to open your mouth.
 
Here is recent research supporting the "gay" gene hypothesis.


I don't hold much hope of this one surviving either since the article you've posted references Levay's 1993 study which Levay himself said the following about in 1994
It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.
and whose study was criticised by many other researchers

e.g.

LeVay has acknowledged that samples of gay men's brain tissue were readily available to him because they had died of AIDS-related illnesses. [7] Contemporaries of LeVay have questioned his measurements, noting the structures themselves are difficult to see in tissue slices, and LeVay measured in volume, where others state cell count is more accurate. [8] Nancy Ordover notes "he has also been criticized for his small sample size and for compiling inadequate sexual histories."[9] Several of his colleagues have noted that the size of the nuclei could be impacted by AIDS, since INAH-3 is dependent on testosterone levels. [10] Hubbard and Wald note, "Though, on average, the size of the hypothalamic nucleus LeVay considered significant was indeed smaller in the men he identified as homosexual, his published data show that the range of sizes of the individual samples was virtually the same as for the heterosexual men. That is, the area was larger in some of the homosexuals than in many of the heterosexual men, and smaller in some of the heterosexual men than in many of the homosexuals. This means that, though the groups showed some difference as groups, there was no way to tell anything about an individual's sexual orientation by looking at his hypothalamus."

I'll examine it more fully later though.

In the meantime you might want to consider the following;

It is considered likely by some authors, including Bailey, that the heritability of homosexuality has been overstated by volunteer studies. For example, a gay man with a gay brother may be more likely to volunteer for a study of gay men and their brothers than will a gay man with a heterosexual brother, perhaps because he feels that his brother will be more willing to cooperate. The prevalence of stigmatization and discord within families occasioned by the "coming out" of a gay member might also reduce the likelihood of a heterosexual brother being willing to participate in the study.

https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

The American Psychological Association has this to say about the subject;

There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.
 
Last edited:
If you can't get your message across without looking like a homophobic religious nutter, you should probably think more about whether to open your mouth.

It's an unfortunate reflection of our modern age that anyone saying anything that conflicts with the prevailing orthodoxy is seen as worse than a nutter, whether they've commented on this subject, Climate Change or a host of other subjects. If this sort of highly intolerant atmosphere existed in Galileo's day he would have faced more than just relatively tepid opposition from the Catholic church in response to his theory of Geocentrism.
 
It's an unfortunate reflection of our modern age that anyone saying anything that conflicts with the prevailing orthodoxy is seen as worse than a nutter, whether they've commented on this subject, Climate Change or a host of other subjects. If this sort of highly intolerant atmosphere existed in Galileo's day he would have faced more than just relatively tepid opposition from the Catholic church in response to his theory of Geocentrism.
Playing the victim , anything so you can justify your hate.
It is very clear and simple and you seem hell bent on justifying that “your going to hell “ for being who you are is not nasty or hateful.
If not hate its Blind ignorance.
 
It's an unfortunate reflection of our modern age that anyone saying anything that conflicts with the prevailing orthodoxy is seen as worse than a nutter, whether they've commented on this subject, Climate Change or a host of other subjects. If this sort of highly intolerant atmosphere existed in Galileo's day he would have faced more than just relatively tepid opposition from the Catholic church in response to his theory of Geocentrism.
While current orthodoxy is "basic respect for your fellow inhabitants of this planet" I'm happy to hang s**t on actions like Folau's that go against it.

And EL OH ******* EL at comparing a "teh gayz wil bern in hel!" meme with the scientific observations of Galileo.
 
It's reasonable to you, but clearly not reasonable to Folau, given what he knows to be true (and he is a lot closer to it than you and I) and his team of lawyers who are taking this all the way. Well, maybe all the way or RU may yet come to an 'amicable settlement'

Who may be in Rugby Unions ear? Is it possible that a premium sponsor has laid out the deal on the table to RU and forcing their hand and if so, what does this mean in the grander scheme of things? You see we're all slaves to the wants of others and with this, everyone is at risk. This is the war that some are taking up for Folau.

By the way, I'm not fighting for Folau at all.
He's either a dickhead for having the 'urge and need' to declare his moral/religious viewpoint in a way that's likely to be offend (as we all now just how much of a crime it is to offend anything and anyone these days) or a genius for devising the plan he has for a grander idea that's not apparent to us yet.
I'd side on the former, but I don't know for sure.

Gee, they couldn't be motivated by other factors, could they?
 
While current orthodoxy is "basic respect for your fellow inhabitants of this planet" I'm happy to hang s**t on actions like Folau's that go against it.

What you're not seeing though is that from the perspective of his worldview, 'telling it like it is' in response to being questioned on the issue, shows more respect to those he sees in danger from an eternal viewpoint than what many churches do. They welcome them with open arms and tell them they're doing nothing wrong. You see him as condemning. If he were, I would agree with you. He would be wrong in doing so because if he's a Christian he shouldn't condemn anyone. God is their judge not the Christian. Christians are to preach the Gospel, part of which involves not shirking the responsibility of showing how God views sin but also pointing people in the direction of Christ who paid the penalty for that sin. As far as I can see, this is what he has done.

And EL OH ******* EL at comparing a "teh gayz wil bern in hel!" meme with the scientific observations of Galileo.
Except that's not what I did. I compared the intolerance of Galileo's time with today. The ironic thing about this issue is that many who see Folau as being intolerant, prove themselves to be more intolerant of his beliefs.
 
What you're not seeing though is that from the perspective of his worldview, 'telling it like it is' in response to being questioned on the issue, shows more respect to those he sees in danger from an eternal viewpoint than what many churches do. They welcome them with open arms and tell them they're doing nothing wrong. You see him as condemning. If he were, I would agree with you. He would be wrong in doing so because if he's a Christian he shouldn't condemn anyone. God is their judge not the Christian. Christians are to preach the Gospel, part of which involves not shirking the responsibility of showing how God views sin but also pointing people in the direction of Christ who paid the penalty for that sin. As far as I can see, this is what he has done.

Except that's not what I did. I compared the intolerance of Galileo's time with today. The ironic thing about this issue is that many who see Folau as being intolerant, prove themselves to be more intolerant of his beliefs.
Oh now Folau is showing respect? Wow.

No. We do not tolerate the intolerant.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Playing the victim , anything so you can justify your hate.
It is very clear and simple and you seem hell bent on justifying that “your going to hell “ for being who you are is not nasty or hateful.
If not hate its Blind ignorance.


I'm not hating on anyone. All I'm doing is trying to give you more of an insight into Folau's worldview in order for you to not be so quick to condemn him. Let me ask you this though, if he hadn't posted the meme but just posted the biblical verse alone -

I Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, 10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

would you still see him as being nasty and hateful? Is it the Bible that's nasty and hateful or is it only nasty and hateful when accompanied with the meme/paraphrase?

My own opinion is he could have dispensed with it. He would've been better served by just adding the next verse to his biblical quotation.

I Corithians 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
 
I'm not hating on anyone. All I'm doing is trying to give you more of an insight into Folau's worldview in order for you to not be so quick to condemn him. Let me ask you this though, if he hadn't posted the meme but just posted the biblical verse alone -



would you still see him as being nasty and hateful? Is it the Bible that's nasty and hateful or is it only nasty and hateful when accompanied with the meme/paraphrase?

My own opinion is he could have dispensed with it. He would've been better served by just adding the next verse to his biblical quotation.
So now your calling “hating” insight??? :rolleyes:
Unbelievable.
 
No. We do not tolerate the intolerant.
I’m not sure I understand this.

Are you saying that any time I feel someone is being intolerant, I can return the favour?
If my neighbor mows his lawn at noon but I have just come off night shift and I’m trying to sleep, he is being intolerant and I can go and give him a piece of my mind?

Isn’t that whole point of tolerance that you act the same way, no matter what is being said or done?
 
The highest paid and a massive hypocrite as well as being a complete idiot and a jerk.

He and his ilk would have us believe that their faith in a particular sky-god allows them to insult whoever they like based on their sky-god beliefs, whenever and wherever they choose to do so. What monumental filth. To hell with him and the horse he rode in on.

And to think: Prime Minister Scum-Mo is going to bring in laws to protect the rights of this w***er and his cohort to publicly demean and put down those whose beliefs don't coincide with his.

Hey, Scum-Mo, I have just invented my own religion which says that I have the right - nay, the duty - to loot and pillage politicians. Is that OK with you? After all, it's my religion, and my religious rights need to be protected regardless of the harm they might cause to others if I act on them, right?
 
Last edited:
The highest paid and a massive hypocrite as well as being a complete idiot and a jerk.

He and his ilk would have us believe that their faith in a particular sky-god allows them to insult whoever they like based on their sky-god beliefs. What monumental filth. To hell with him and the horse he rode in on.

And to think: Prime Minister Scum-Mo is going to bring in laws to protect the rights of this w***er and his cohort to publicly demean and put down those whose beliefs don't coincide with his.

Hey, Scum-Mo, I have just invented my own religion which says that I have the right - nay, the duty - to loot and pillage politicians. Is that OK with you? After all, it's my religion, and my religious rights need to be protected regardless of the harm they might cause to others if I act on them, right?
the libs want people like folau to have the right to openly express their religious views without the threat of losing their job, yet are legislating that people can lose their job simply for being gay.

absolute dirtbag human being the lot of them. his nickname should definitely be scumo.
 
The Bible also says that slavery is AOK and that a woman should always obey a man no matter what. So all you sky-god-bashers are good with this? I could cite a whole slew of other insane pronouncements in the Bible if any Folau-supporting morons wish me to.
 
As I thought, you can't answer the question so instead you pose your own. One based on false premises at that. View attachment 702905
No you didnt think.
Issy decision to publically hate gays is disgusting , just like your support of him. Regardless if it is in a sentence or a meme. There you go I answered your inane question which has no relevance.

Answer this, why is it ok for Issy to vilify homosexuals??? How can this hate be fair comment or justified???
 
While current orthodoxy is "basic respect for your fellow inhabitants of this planet" I'm happy to hang s**t on actions like Folau's that go against it.
Are you showing basic respect for Israel Folau and the untold numbers of people around the world who share his opinions?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top