Israel Folau can send this thread to hell and no others

[fatprop]

Are you suggesting Folau is a prophet?

He was stating his beliefs as he is taught and believes, nothing prophetic about it

We all believe in fantasies, as a Tahs supporter, I have lived in them for years

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[fatprop]

When I tell my boss to go to hell today it will be fine because hell is just a construct devised by religion and therefore all good....

Meh, have you any understanding of words and context?

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

[Derpus]

Man if hell exists i'm so screwed ay

 

[Braveheart81]

He was stating his beliefs as he is taught and believes,

That's irrelevant. What he said is clearly offensive to others.

His comment clearly indicates that he thinks that there is something wrong with someone for being gay and that they are inferior to others.

This has nothing to do with religious tolerance. He is free to observe his religion. The line is clearly when his observance of that religion impacts on others via his homophobic comment.

Words matter.

Anyway, it seems like plenty of people will never be convinced that this should matter at all and that any reaction by Qantas or RA is completely over the top.

 

[wamberal]

The really ironic thing is that Jesus (as far as we can glean, from the very limited reliable information that we have about him) was born, lived, and died as an observant Jew.


He preached in the synagogues, which kind of hints that he embraced Judaism.


There is no "hell" in Judaism.

 

[TOCC]

He was stating his beliefs as he is taught and believes, nothing prophetic about it

Yet when Pocock states his beliefs and calls out Potgeiter for making derogatory remarks callin someone a ‘faggot’ on the field you took real issue with it and stated that it should have been done off to the side once the match was finished so it doesn’t make a scene. Why have you not demanded that Folau should have done the same thing, expressed his views in a medium which didn’t cause such a scene?

Or is this a case it’s ok when those beliefs allign with your own, but it’s not ok when they don’t?

 

[Pfitzy]

There is no "hell" in Judaism.

Or at all.

 

[Brumby Runner]

And that should be the end of the debate. Thanks Pfitzy.

 

[fatprop]

Yet when Pocock states his beliefs and calls out Potgeiter for making derogatory remarks callin someone a ‘faggot’ on the field you took real issue with it and stated that it should have been done off to the side once the match was finished so it doesn’t make a scene. Why have you not demanded that Folau should have done the same thing, expressed his views in a medium which didn’t cause such a scene?

Or is this a case it’s ok when those beliefs allign with your own, but it’s not ok when they don’t?

It is called context and nuance. I, for some strange reason, think the rugby field and a question on social media are different

 

[TOCC]

To my mind your question denies each party their individual right to be themselves, making noone happy

Rather why cant each party be themselves despite what is said - requiring an element of respect not witch hunt

So you’re saying Christians can’t be happy unless they’re telling the world gays should go to hell?

As for your second point, I agree, people should be able to hold whatever sexual orientation suits them without having people like Folau incite witch hunts telling them they’re going to hell.

 

[fatprop]

That's irrelevant. What he said is clearly offensive to others.

His comment clearly indicates that he thinks that there is something wrong with someone for being gay and that they are inferior to others.

This has nothing to do with religious tolerance. He is free to observe his religion. The line is clearly when his observance of that religion impacts on others via his homophobic comment.

Words matter.

See this is where we completely disagree, I don't see someone taking offence at his beliefs as an issue at all.

Hey, many a Christian maybe offended about Pfitzy's post above as well, is it OK to be offended by Folau's beliefs, but OK to post what maybe considered by some offensive memes about Christians?

I do get amused with the number of people taking offence on behalf of others on the internet

 

[Tex]

Mods kill the thread or demand it only continues via meme

 

[cyclopath]

Mods kill the thread or demand it only continues via meme

Unfair advantage to Dismal Pillock. He needs no leg-up!

 

[TOCC]

It is called context and nuance. I, for some strange reason, think the rugby field and a question on social media are different

Yet you took issue with negative comments harming the Australian Rugby brand, your issue was that Pocock critisiced the use of ‘faggott’ which brought media scrutiny, perhaps I need to refresh you on what you said::

]Ahh no it hasn't, there was no benefit to the Australian Rugby brand whatsoever in highlighting to the world that homophobic taunts are still happening.

But now that the comments are on the other foot, now that it’s someone criticising homosexuality and damaging the brand by association you jump to their defence and claim it’s free speech and one expressing their own beliefs.

I guess the true context depends on whether your beliefs align with those creating the ‘scene’ or not

 

[Omar Comin']

So you’re saying Christians can’t be happy unless they’re telling the world gays should go to hell?

As for your second point, I agree, people should be able to hold whatever sexual orientation suits them without having people like Folau incite witch hunts telling them they’re going to hell.

I agree with you, because like you I think Folau's belief is hateful, made up garbage.

But put yourself in his shoes. If you believed, as Folau does, that homosexuality is sinful and to avoid hell required someone to repent or seek redemption from Jesus/God, then you would believe the best thing you can do for gay people is to spread the word so that they can avoid hell. You could argue quite easily from that starting point that saying such things comes from a place of love for your fellow men and women.

If your inclusion policy tolerates all religious beliefs, then you have to be prepared to tolerate the religious views and spoken beliefs that aren't themselves fully tolerant.

 

[TOCC]

This thread isn’t what people joined this forum for, defend Folau all you like but the fact is his comments fuelled this page to 10 pages long, thats says enough about the contentiousness of his comments. I don’t enjoy this discussion, I despise that it needs to be had and frankly some of the comments are just wilful ignorance, both sides can choose who they think that applies too. I wish Folau never said w

Enjoy your rugby lads... this isn’t enjoyable

TOCC out

 

[Braveheart81]

But put yourself in his shoes. If you believed, as Folau does, that homosexuality is sinful and to avoid hell required someone to repent or seek redemption from Jesus/God, then you would believe the best thing you can do for gay people is to spread the word so that they can avoid hell. You could argue quite easily from that starting point that saying such things comes from a place of love for your fellow men and women.

If your inclusion policy tolerates all religious beliefs, then you have to be prepared to tolerate the religious views and spoken beliefs that aren't themselves fully tolerant.

I think the first paragraph is a stretch. The context around it is pretty clearly one that suggests that gay people are inferior.

No you don't. Tolerance only needs to extend to the point at which someone else's views start impacting negatively on others.

Hey, many a Christian maybe offended about Pfitzy's post above as well, is it OK to be offended by Folau's beliefs, but OK to post what maybe considered by some offensive memes about Christians?

Whilst there is plenty of Monty Python that would offend Christians, I'm unsure where the legend of Excalibur fits within their belief system.

 

[fatprop]

Yet you took issue with negative comments harming the Australian Rugby brand, your issue was that Pocock critisiced the use of ‘faggott’ which brought media scrutiny, perhaps I need to refresh you on what you said::



But now that the comments are on the other foot, now that it’s someone criticising homosexuality and damaging the brand by association you jump to their defence and claim it’s free speech and one expressing their own beliefs.

I guess the true context depends on whether your beliefs align with those creating the ‘scene’ or not

I still see both as different (I am impressed with your efforts to find an old post )

I still think Pocock should have sat down with Pots after the game instead of running to the ref

And Folau? he was asked a question about his beliefs and answered it.

 

[cyclopath]

I think we've exhausted the topic, and there is unlikely to be any further useful content. We already have one long term poster leave the building.
Enough.