The Israel Folau saga

[Quick Hands]

Isn't the whole point that we cede our freedoms to those paying us?

If you don't want to accept those limits, don't accept the payment. That's why it's a contract.

Izzy Folau, waratah and wallaby, can't post this stuff. When he's not on the payroll, he's free to excersise his religious freedoms how he likes

I think that contract law is a little more complex than this. I don't believe that you cede all rights and freedoms to an employer at all. As far as I know it's an extremely complex part of the law (which is why equity lawyers are so well paid).

A lot depends exactly on what the contract says, and oral statements made prior to the contract (such as a party agreeing not to post things on social media) don't apply unless specifically written in the contract. We've discovered in the past few days that the standard RA contract makes no mention of social media use at all and thus RA will be relying on the catch-all "bringing the game into disrepute" clause.

He seems to have brought himself into disrepute, but it's a bit of a stretch to say how he has brought "the game" into disrepute. He wasn't purporting to speak on behalf of RA, NSWRU or any other rugby body, he wasn't saying that those of us bound for hell shouldn't be able to play rugby. As far as we know, the post in question had no specific reference to rugby. Equally, he's made no comment about any of RA's sponsors.

As much as many people might not like what he said, he now has the same rights as everyone else in this matter including; natural justice and the right to have his case brought before an independent tribunal for judgement. RA have an appalling record in these type of matters, so we'll have to wait and see what happens.

 

[Quick Hands]

No-one is being offended on others behalf. People are saying, Israel shouldn't be spouting this bullshit when he's specifically be contracted not to. There's absolutely no need for him to express his views on who and shouldn't go to a made up hell.

I wouldn't be so sure about this bit.

 

[Quick Hands]

All of us need cool heads though. Avoidance of persecution due to sexual preference is to be supported. So is avoiding persecution of religious preference. Both should be protected.

Very well-balanced and thoughtful statement. I completely agree.

 

[liquor box]

Because there are plenty of you girls and boys who are at a confusing time in their lives learning about their sexuality and are told by one of Australia’s biggest stars that what they’re feeling isn’t normal and are a lesser human being in their eyes.

This issue isn’t just about those older and wiser people in our society who are able to cast Israel comments to the side as being stupid.

I dont think he is saying what they are feeling is not normal or they are a lesser human beings.

I dont believe he has ever said or implied that.

He is saying that they are sinning in his opinion. This is vastly different.

 

[liquor box]

The irony is that a belief in the archaic concept of "hell" is a precondition to being hurt by what he tweeted. If a person does not believe in "hell", why feel threatened by what is essentially a fictional punishment?

This is what I have always thought, how can you be upset at a concept you don't believe exists.

It reminds me of people who are concerned that their children will be brainwashed if a religious person talks to their kids at school. If it is all made up and has no basis in fact then it should be pretty easy to arm your children with the knowledge that what they hear is wrong and to stop any brainwashing.

Same with Folau's comments, if you are concerned that your child will believe his comments or will be affected by them then why not talk to them and point out what is wrong with them.

I watch sport with my daughter and if she tells me she likes a player who has "issues" I make sure she is aware that they are just good at sport but not good human beings. She understands this at 5 years old, it is an easy concept for a child to understand, it is just like the story line for Beauty and the Beast, just because you are awesome on the outside does not make you a nice person on the inside, and being nice on the inside is what is important.

 

[Slim 293]

This is what I have always thought, how can you be upset at a concept you don't believe exists.

That's clearly beside the point............

 

[wamberal]

Absolutely spot on, Liquorbox. There are a lot of people with hidden agendas having a field day with this. Oops.

 

[liquor box]

Fuck, do we really doubt that being young and gay, which can already be bloody tough, is only made harder by stars spouting vitriolic shit like this.

How many openly gay men do we have across the four football codes right now? Zero. How many gay footy stars do young gay rugby players have to look up to? Zero.

Clearly not a very inclusive environment with lots of people living a lie every day. We are not in an environment where we can afford kooks like Izzy disparaging homosexuality.

Maybe this has nothing to do with the attitude towards homosexuality.

It is accepted that Homosexuals are born that way and do not choose to be homosexual.

Surely there has to be some difference at the point of birth that makes this the case. Is homosexuality "built in" genetically at some level? If so, then what effect has this on the person as a whole?

It seems in my unscientific observations that male homosexuals appear to succeed at a higher rate than heterosexuals in the arts and fashion design and female high level physical sports seem to have a high percentage of homosexual athletes.

Is it possible that there are some types of traits in some people, genetic if you will, that allow them to succeed at a higher level at certain occupations or sports?

Obviously there are exceptions to this rule in all fields and is a mass generalization, but claiming the number of homosexual players is reduced by a twitter post may also be a generalization.

 

[Dan54]

Does anyone on here actually follow Izzy on twitter or what ever it is? Would like to know.

 

[Slim 293]

Does anyone on here actually follow Izzy on twitter or what ever it is? Would like to know.

Nah, I had a look at his page following his latest brainfart and there's just a lot of flogging Jesus with the occasional sponsorship tie in.........

 

[liquor box]

There's absolutely no need for him to express his views on who and shouldn't go to a made up hell.

.

I think he is expressing the view of god and is passing on the message.

He also happens to believe the message.

 

[liquor box]

Does anyone on here actually follow Izzy on twitter or what ever it is? Would like to know.

I did for a short period of time but stopped because I was not interested in his posts.

 

[tragic]

Ok, you think bullying is limited to “relentless and individually targeted humiliation in front of peers”?

Perhaps read some of them cyber bullying journal articles, which you keep claiming I haven’t read

I’m trying to point out the difference between posting persecutory ideology, and targeted cyber bullying, which is an entirely different beast.
But I’m obviously not doing a very good job of it so I’ll leave it at that.

 

[Adam84]

I’m trying to point out the difference between posting persecutory ideology, and targeted cyber bullying, which is an entirely different beast.
But I’m obviously not doing a very good job of it so I’ll leave it at that.

I thought you were trying to point out that bullying by definition is “relentless and individually targeted humiliation in front of peers” so any discussion of Folau and journal articles which discuss the impact of social media, bullying and the impact of youth and at risk minorities were an unrelated issue.

you asked for evidence that social media and bullying has an impact on young people, I’ve pointed out their are literally hundreds of academic journal articles discussing the very issue you have asked for, you now refute that because it doesn’t suit your very specific definition of bullying.

 

[Dctarget]

Maybe this has nothing to do with the attitude towards homosexuality.

It is accepted that Homosexuals are born that way and do not choose to be homosexual.

Surely there has to be some difference at the point of birth that makes this the case. Is homosexuality "built in" genetically at some level? If so, then what effect has this on the person as a whole?

It seems in my unscientific observations that male homosexuals appear to succeed at a higher rate than heterosexuals in the arts and fashion design and female high level physical sports seem to have a high percentage of homosexual athletes.

Is it possible that there are some types of traits in some people, genetic if you will, that allow them to succeed at a higher level at certain occupations or sports?

Obviously there are exceptions to this rule in all fields and is a mass generalization, but claiming the number of homosexual players is reduced by a twitter post may also be a generalization.

This is a path I don't really want to go down, but sure, maybe there are less than average number of gay sportsmen. You certainly see an inverse with lesbians in sport. So, it's very possible that it is linked to something on a genetic level. Statistically, even if there were 50% less gay people in sport, or go extreme and say 10%, that still leaves a lot of men who are so uncomfortable in their professional environment that they have to pretend to be someone else. I'm saying the twitter post does nothing to make that environment better.

 

[Dctarget]

Like or dislike Jason Ball, he provides a valuable insight.

“I loved playing sport, but on the footy field, the word gay was used to mean bad, weak, stupid or disgusting.

“The toll it took on my mental health was profound. At times I wondered if it would be easier if I didn’t exist.


“I am now an out and proud gay man, but it broke my heart to think of all the kids struggling to come to terms with their sexuality who would hearFolau’s assertions that “hell awaits”them and feel ashamed, afraid and alone.”

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/easier-...ZRvS9WYNKXq2KXEzq3n6xPl4YhrbIhDkrUjcNPHVcsEfu

 

[wamberal]

Did Izzy use the word "gay" in his latest sermon on the twitter? I am certainly not defending him, but we have moved a helluva long way forward as a nation over the last few years. Marriage equality surely means a lot.



I can remember the days of poofter-bashing. Bashing to death in some cases. The days when gays could be imprisoned in Tasmania. Society has changed, is changing. There are always a few dinosaurs.

 

[tragic]

I thought you were trying to point out that bullying by definition is “relentless and individually targeted humiliation in front of peers” so any discussion of Folau and journal articles which discuss the impact of social media, bullying and the impact of youth and at risk minorities were an unrelated issue.

you asked for evidence that social media and bullying has an impact on young people, I’ve pointed out their are literally hundreds of academic journal articles discussing the very issue you have asked for, you now refute that because it doesn’t suit your very specific definition of bullying.

No.
Of course social media and bullying has an impact on young people.
Its just that this current issue doesn’t meet the definition of bullying in the above mentioned journal articles which you are trying to use as evidence to suit your arguement.
And you don’t seem to understand the difference.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Vunipola roundly booed by Bristol's crowd everytime he touched the ball after supporting Folau on twitter

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47869324

 

[gel]

Vunipola roundly booed by Bristol's crowd everytime he touched the ball after supporting Folau on twitter

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/47869324

Two wrongs don't make a right.