Non-Lions discussion 2022

[spotthedog1]

Really not sure?

But I'm not questioning the hiring values of that particular church. I am just wondering in which circumstances organisations are allowed to preclude people from working for them on account of their personal lives/values.

Is it only organisations with a Cross, Star of David, Crescent and Star etc... on their edifice?

I certainly hope not. I think an organsation should only be able to preclude employees when directly relevant to their organisation's work.

I think churches (mosques, etc) should be able to include religious belief when considering employees. I also think political parties should be able to consider political beliefs. I wouldn't have an issue with a women's rights organisation considering gender.

I don't think football clubs should be able to consider political beliefs nor religious beliefs, affiliations, etc.

 

[spotthedog1]

The church has espoused a view that gay marriage is a sin and should not be allowed. Old mate has stated that he supports people's right to hold that view.

To tolerate means to "allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one dislikes or disagrees with) without interference."

A view of "same sex marriage should not be allowed" is not tolerance by definition as it inherently seeks to interfere with gay people's right to marry.

Being the leader of the church that esposes that view, and not condemning it (but instead supporting his congregation's right to hold it) falls short of the values that most non-religious organisations hold and the standards they expect from their leaders when embodying those values.

By leading the church, old mate says its okay to not tolerate gay marriage and by extension, gay people and their rights. That's not good enough.

No, thats not correct.

The church held a sermon, in 2013, where whoever was preaching (I don't know whether an employee or a visiting preacher) stated that gay marriage was not Biblical. That does not mean that the chairman who started 7 years later and had no say on doctrine said not to tolerate gay people. That is ludicrous.

 

[brizrider]

I don't think football clubs should be able to consider political beliefs nor religious beliefs, affiliations,

Most organisations are smart enough to vet senior people they don’t want without attracting claims of discrimination

 

[briztoon]

Also, in my experience, Hillsong has a strong following amongst politicians and executives in corporate Australia. It's like a weird congregation of the elite.

Networking.

 

[briztoon]

I've often wondered why the church still seems to have so much sway in politics in this country given the swings towards atheism in the census'. Give it another hundred or so years I guess.

I know some people don't distinguish between Churches. Christian is Christian, etc.

But isn't it the Born Again Christian style churches (I have no idea, if there is a more appropriate name they should be called) that appear to be gaining power amongst politicians and businesses.

These churches are more "hard core" or right wing than modern day Catholic or Anglican churches, which appear to trying to appeal to a broader community from an outsiders view. When I see images of older churches congregations, their members are aging and much fewer in number, than what I used to see when I was dragged along as a kid. Whereas these newer churches are jammed packed with families and young adults, and appear to be making millions. (the concept of churches making a profit or needing a board is somewhat abhorrent to me)

 

[Sausages]

I know some people don't distinguish between Churches. Christian is Christian, etc.

But isn't it the Born Again Christian style churches (I have no idea, if there is a more appropriate name they should be called) that appear to be gaining power amongst politicians and businesses.

These churches are more "hard core" or right wing than modern day Catholic or Anglican churches, which appear to trying to appeal to a broader community from an outsiders view. When I see images of older churches congregations, their members are aging and much fewer in number, than what I used to see when I was dragged along as a kid. Whereas these newer churches are jammed packed with families and young adults, and appear to be making millions. (the concept of churches making a profit or needing a board is somewhat abhorrent to me)

Pentecostal is the usual blanket term given to those churches.

 

[spotthedog1]

I know some people don't distinguish between Churches. Christian is Christian, etc.

But isn't it the Born Again Christian style churches (I have no idea, if there is a more appropriate name they should be called) that appear to be gaining power amongst politicians and businesses.

These churches are more "hard core" or right wing than modern day Catholic or Anglican churches, which appear to trying to appeal to a broader community from an outsiders view. When I see images of older churches congregations, their members are aging and much fewer in number, than what I used to see when I was dragged along as a kid. Whereas these newer churches are jammed packed with families and young adults, and appear to be making millions. (the concept of churches making a profit or needing a board is somewhat abhorrent to me)

You are largely correct, though I think there are more distinctions required.

Catholic and strict Anglican churches are largely in decline (aging, as you said). You've referred to "born again" style churches, and that's fine if that's how you want to describe them. They are generally growing. These cover a few denominations, and contrary to your indication, aren't necessarily the hard core right wing places.

They cover the range, from Uniting Churches, which are generally quite left wing, through to your more conservative churches. Megachurches are a different cat altogether. Sausages described them above as "pentecostal", and that's probably accurate for the megachurches, though the pentecostals are again a bit broader than that.

Just to cover quickly: pretty much all churches have boards of some form. It's actually a requirement in most registered organisations in Australia, and has nothing to do with uber-profits. More often it's staffing, compliance work, etc. As a side note, City on a Hill aren't a megachurch, and the board would almost certainly be unpaid (I have no inside info on them, but generally...).

The churches and profit thing is a bit of an odd one. For every megachurch with their own private jet (I think 2 in Australia), there are thousands who run pretty close to neutral. Rich pastors are kinda a rarity.

I've moved a few times in the last few years, so I've actually attended 5 or 6 churches (3 different denominations, all "born again", but not megachurches) in the last decade. All of them published their financials to the members. None of the pastors earned as much as I do (I'm not uber-rich). All of them had programs in the community, and all of them were involved with what you'd call charitable projects overseas. That's more representative of your average church in Australia.

 

[lionraven]

I like how right whingers are flagging this as 'cancel culture' without spending a single second looking at the background of the guy. This man is a sleazy shitbag who was forced to resign from his cushy banking CEO job after damning royal commission findings. He was in charge of NAB whilst they were raking in millions of dollars charging dead people unnecessary fees for services not delivered. His defence in all this was he was professionally negligent. Thats the best he could come up with. What a bunch of bullshit. Banks are notorious for tracking every single cent in our modern online world. You're telling me the CEO of a big four bank had no idea how they were getting millions of dollars without giving any service at all. That no one at the NAB had any idea how these millions fell into their balance sheets? This guy is a disgrace and none of the QCs in the royal commission bought his bullshit. Hence he immediately resigned as soon as the findings were public.

Whats even more disgraceful is that Essendon would allow someone by their own admission as professionally negligent and has no AFL experience to lead a review of their football operations. Whats even worse is that Essendon allowed him to even apply for the job he was responsible for recruiting. Absolutely disgraceful jobs for the boys nepotism shitcampaignerery. No wonder that club has been stale for 20+ years. Essendon, a true microcosm of the general Australian elite - nepotism between corporate and non-corporate Australia where the turds float to the top and we continue to tread water internationally instead of collapsing thanks to being the last continent to fully exploit their natural resources.

Also if your first thought when seeing this article is 'another white male victim', maybe you aren't as colourblind as you think you are. Turn off sky news. Uninstall facebook from your phone and go and enjoy some time in nature. The 'culture war' that is living rent free in your head will disipate and you will enjoy life just a little bit more.

 

[lionraven]

Also its a clear conflict of interest to be a chairman of a conservative church which is responsible for progressing their own regressive views on homosexuality/LGBT issues, feminism etc and also be chairman of a football club that is meant to engender inclusiveness for all. You cannot physically hold these two roles without having a conflict of interest in the other role. Its like being the chairman for both the Australian pork industry and PETA. You cannot advocate for one organisation without harming the progress of the other.

Also there is a difference between being a member of a church and being a chairman of a church. In one role you have personal liberties in how you engage in the church and hence can minimise your conflicts of interest; in the other role you are responsible for advancing your church's agenda and hence there is no separation between you and the church - hence there will always be a conflict of interest. You can totally be a vegetarian and take on a significant role in the pork industry if you wanted as your personal views may not interfere with your job performance. However if you were a chairman of an animal rights group then being a large advocate for animal slaughter is an impossible position to hold.

 

[western royboy]

I like how right whingers are flagging this as 'cancel culture' without spending a single second looking at the background of the guy. This man is a sleazy shitbag who was forced to resign from his cushy banking CEO job after damning royal commission findings. He was in charge of NAB whilst they were raking in millions of dollars charging dead people unnecessary fees for services not delivered. His defence in all this was he was professionally negligent. Thats the best he could come up with. What a bunch of bullshit. Banks are notorious for tracking every single cent in our modern online world. You're telling me the CEO of a big four bank had no idea how they were getting millions of dollars without giving any service at all. That no one at the NAB had any idea how these millions fell into their balance sheets? This guy is a disgrace and none of the QCs in the royal commission bought his bullshit. Hence he immediately resigned as soon as the findings were public.

Whats even more disgraceful is that Essendon would allow someone by their own admission as professionally negligent and has no AFL experience to lead a review of their football operations. Whats even worse is that Essendon allowed him to even apply for the job he was responsible for recruiting. Absolutely disgraceful jobs for the boys nepotism shitcampaignerery. No wonder that club has been stale for 20+ years. Essendon, a true microcosm of the general Australian elite - nepotism between corporate and non-corporate Australia where the turds float to the top and we continue to tread water internationally instead of collapsing thanks to being the last continent to fully exploit their natural resources.

Also if your first thought when seeing this article is 'another white male victim', maybe you aren't as colourblind as you think you are. Turn off sky news. Uninstall facebook from your phone and go and enjoy some time in nature. The 'culture war' that is living rent free in your head will disipate and you will enjoy life just a little bit more.

Bingo

 

[western royboy]

Also its a clear conflict of interest to be a chairman of a conservative church which is responsible for progressing their own regressive views on homosexuality/LGBT issues, feminism etc and also be chairman of a football club that is meant to engender inclusiveness for all. You cannot physically hold these two roles without having a conflict of interest in the other role. Its like being the chairman for both the Australian pork industry and PETA. You cannot advocate for one organisation without harming the progress of the other.

Also there is a difference between being a member of a church and being a chairman of a church. In one role you have personal liberties in how you engage in the church and hence can minimise your conflicts of interest; in the other role you are responsible for advancing your church's agenda and hence there is no separation between you and the church - hence there will always be a conflict of interest. You can totally be a vegetarian and take on a significant role in the pork industry if you wanted as your personal views may not interfere with your job performance. However if you were a chairman of an animal rights group then being a large advocate for animal slaughter is an impossible position to hold.

And again

 

[Sanchez365]

We really pulling all the politics and religious threads and unearthing everyone's true colors this off season aren't we.

Remember when we all just anonymously talked about football?

 

[spotthedog1]

I like how right whingers are flagging this as 'cancel culture' without spending a single second looking at the background of the guy. This man is a sleazy shitbag who was forced to resign from his cushy banking CEO job after damning royal commission findings. He was in charge of NAB whilst they were raking in millions of dollars charging dead people unnecessary fees for services not delivered. His defence in all this was he was professionally negligent. Thats the best he could come up with. What a bunch of bullshit. Banks are notorious for tracking every single cent in our modern online world. You're telling me the CEO of a big four bank had no idea how they were getting millions of dollars without giving any service at all. That no one at the NAB had any idea how these millions fell into their balance sheets? This guy is a disgrace and none of the QCs in the royal commission bought his bullshit. Hence he immediately resigned as soon as the findings were public.

Whats even more disgraceful is that Essendon would allow someone by their own admission as professionally negligent and has no AFL experience to lead a review of their football operations. Whats even worse is that Essendon allowed him to even apply for the job he was responsible for recruiting. Absolutely disgraceful jobs for the boys nepotism shitcampaignerery. No wonder that club has been stale for 20+ years. Essendon, a true microcosm of the general Australian elite - nepotism between corporate and non-corporate Australia where the turds float to the top and we continue to tread water internationally instead of collapsing thanks to being the last continent to fully exploit their natural resources.

Also if your first thought when seeing this article is 'another white male victim', maybe you aren't as colourblind as you think you are. Turn off sky news. Uninstall facebook from your phone and go and enjoy some time in nature. The 'culture war' that is living rent free in your head will disipate and you will enjoy life just a little bit more.

And if he was dismissed because of his banking experience, that would that would relevant.

Also its a clear conflict of interest to be a chairman of a conservative church which is responsible for progressing their own regressive views on homosexuality/LGBT issues, feminism etc and also be chairman of a football club that is meant to engender inclusiveness for all. You cannot physically hold these two roles without having a conflict of interest in the other role. Its like being the chairman for both the Australian pork industry and PETA. You cannot advocate for one organisation without harming the progress of the other.

Also there is a difference between being a member of a church and being a chairman of a church. In one role you have personal liberties in how you engage in the church and hence can minimise your conflicts of interest; in the other role you are responsible for advancing your church's agenda and hence there is no separation between you and the church - hence there will always be a conflict of interest. You can totally be a vegetarian and take on a significant role in the pork industry if you wanted as your personal views may not interfere with your job performance. However if you were a chairman of an animal rights group then being a large advocate for animal slaughter is an impossible position to hold.

PETA and the pork industry? That's your parallel? Only a little off, don't you think?

Well, let's see what hateful and intolerant things he's said about gay people...

Yeah, lets hang the guy. Literally no negative comments, no negative practices, about gay rights. Like most Christians, Thurbold clearly believed it would be a sin to discriminate against someone for their sexual orientation.

The most important commandment is to love the Lord your God... the second most important is like it - love your neighbour as yourself. Ignore the televangelists and the nutjobs the media run to when they want a pull quote. That's what most "anti-gay" churches believe.

 

[dlanod]

And if he was dismissed because of his banking experience, that would that would relevant.

He wasn't dismissed...

I know that's a technicality, but it's pretty key - he could have chosen to wait it out or force Essendon's hand, but he chose to step down instead.

 

[spotthedog1]

He wasn't dismissed...

I know that's a technicality, but it's pretty key - he could have chosen to wait it out or force Essendon's hand, but he chose to step down instead.

It's a factor, but it's not everything. He would meet the Fair Work Act definition of a "forced resignation", which is a type of dismissal under the law.

 

[Sproj]

Regardless of whatever view about whether he should have been sacked / encouraged to resign whatever, Essendon is going nowhere with that other idiot in charge. He made himself look a total fool with the handling of the coach situation and now this. I hope he refuses to fall on his sword because as long as he is in charge, Essendon is going to remain totally irrelevant and that means one less team for us to worry about each year. He is terrible for Essendon, great for everyone else...I wonder what the odds are he ends up in charge of the Broncos / NRL.

 

[Cubs2Lions]

We really pulling all the politics and religious threads and unearthing everyone's true colors this off season aren't we.

Remember when we all just anonymously talked about football?

 

[briztoon]

 

[Sausages]

 

[Cubs2Lions]

You forgot the biggest name of all……………………. KEVIN SHEEDY

 

[captainrich]

I wonder why Gold Coast are trading out Bowes for a salary dump and giving up big assets yet then paying overs for Ben Long

22

Ben Long

Age

26

Ht

186cm

Wt

81kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.9

3star

K

6.2

2star

HB

4.7

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.7

4star

MG

166.8

3star

D

12.8

3star

K

6.7

3star

HB

6.2

4star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.3

3star

MG

129.0

2star

D

13.4

4star

K

6.8

3star

HB

6.6

4star

M

3.2

4star

T

3.2

5star

MG

223.0

4star

? Ridiculous management of that club

 

[dlanod]

I wonder why Gold Coast are trading out Bowes for a salary dump and giving up big assets yet then paying overs for Ben Long? Ridiculous management of that club

Because one is better than the other

 

[captainrich]

Because one is better than the other

Ben long barely got a game in a very average St kilda team and never really stood out. Pre injury Bowes was great at the Suns. Right now they're effectively paying pick 7 pick 32 and bowes for long...doesn't seem to be right value does it

 

[dlanod]

Ben long barely got a game in a very average St kilda team and never really stood out. Pre injury Bowes was great at the Suns. Right now they're effectively paying pick 7 pick 32 and bowes for long...doesn't seem to be right value does it

Lol don't mind me, confused Ben Long and Ben King in name only.

 

[captainrich]

Lol don't mind me, confused Ben Long and Ben King in name only.

Hahaa all good....do you then agree this is a ridiculous situation?