Jump to content

Israel Folau


fevnut

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Keegan Hirst on BBC breakfast this morning could do with finding a more prominent job in the games for him when he finishes. As for Folau it’s not so much what he said as everyone can make a mistake and get a second chance. The issue is he still doesn’t think he’s done anything wrong. People comparing it to drug cheats or wife beaters. If those drug cheats had said publicly that they are sorry for any upset but they are their own personal drugs and they will be using them in private would they still be getting signed. 

They are his strong beliefs and that of many others , so yes he sees he has done no wrong; he is standing up for his religious belief which not everyone agrees with

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

All Israel Folau has done is express his view. He can't personally send homosexuals to hell and, as far as we know, he hasn't inflicted any personal violence against gay people  or blocked their employment prospects.

He's entitled to his opinion and we're entitled to ignore it. We've players in our game that have committed actual crimes and nobody moans about them playing when their sentence is up.

 

 

Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Keegan Hirst on BBC breakfast this morning could do with finding a more prominent job in the games for him when he finishes. As for Folau it’s not so much what he said as everyone can make a mistake and get a second chance. The issue is he still doesn’t think he’s done anything wrong. People comparing it to drug cheats or wife beaters. If those drug cheats had said publicly that they are sorry for any upset but they are their own personal drugs and they will be using them in private would they still be getting signed. 

maybe this hirst guy should do his talking on a rugby pitch.  thats usually how its done in rugby league.  he looks a big unit, if he catches folau im sure he could put a good hit on him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm instinctively uncomfortable with banning Folau based on the tweets and comments he's made. He essentially gave a long list of behaviours he believes to be sins and said people practicing them were going to hell. He wasn't attacking an individual, or making threats, it was all very general. I don't see anything that really merits being banned from playing our sport, or any other. It's distasteful, but I don't like the idea of banning him from the sport simply because he has some hardline, archaic religious beliefs.

I think I'd feel differently if he'd singled out an individual for those comments, for example if he'd tweeted an openly gay player and told him he was going to hell. That would feel different, like a personal attack on someone who hadn't done anything to merit it.

All that said, I wouldn't want him playing for my team, and I don't particularly want him playing RL. It would have been better for all concerned if Bernard Guasch had left this one alone.

"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

I'm aware that it was stupid, ill-conceived and pointless precisely because the answer was obvious, which was why I asked it.

Of course nothing Folau could tweet would have any effect on the pride you take in your son's achievements.

So bearing that in mind, why should that affect whether or not you support the Catalans Dragons?

As I have pointed out earlier, my daughter and son-in-law are evangelical Christians who have some views that I strongly disagree with.

But that doesn't mean that I would not give them as much support as I could with their lives and with bringing up their children.

Part of the art of living is recognising that some people who you might otherwise admire and respect have opinions that you might dispute, but not to the extent of driving a wedge between you.

But unfortunately in the modern world far too many people seem to want to exacerbate division while hypocritically proclaiming that they are encouraging diversity.

Then why on earth ask it? Was it a bit of rhetoric thrown down merely to provoke a reaction? 

I won't support the Dragons because I'd rather be able to look my son in the eye. He's suffered the slings and arrows enough from people like Folau, who, in his tiny little mind and his arrogance, believe that their belief in a bunch of bronze age fairy tales allows them the right to spout hate filled rhetoric against a section of society that has already suffered enough.

As Keegan Hurst alluded to this morning on TV, have the Dragons sacrificed their values, if they had any in the first place, for the sake of a few extra points or climbing  a couple of places up the table?

Yet I see the argument you are trying to make. There are many people I admire whose opinion on certain subjects do not agree with my own - the important point is the subject matter to which the opinion is directed and how it is expressed. Plus, it's ironic that you mention the 'art of living' as I am currently studying Arts and Humanities with the OU!

However, I'm an atheist and Folau, through his religious based ignorance reminds me why I am. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a sport that has welcomed back some real grubs over the years, I find it extremely strange that the line is being drawn with Folau. In Australia, we’ve had the likes of Matt Lodge, Russell Packer, Greg Bird, Greg Inglis, Ben Barba and plenty of others who have done bad things welcomed back. I don’t keep up with the sport in England but I know you’ve had the likes of Ben Flower, Albert Kelly who don’t have clean track records. But yet the line is being drawn with Folau. Why is that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CiderWire said:

Then why on earth ask it? Was it a bit of rhetoric thrown down merely to provoke a reaction? 

I won't support the Dragons because I'd rather be able to look my son in the eye. He's suffered the slings and arrows enough from people like Folau, who, in his tiny little mind and his arrogance, believe that their belief in a bunch of bronze age fairy tales allows them the right to spout hate filled rhetoric against a section of society that has already suffered enough.

As Keegan Hurst alluded to this morning on TV, have the Dragons sacrificed their values, if they had any in the first place, for the sake of a few extra points or climbing  a couple of places up the table?

Yet I see the argument you are trying to make. There are many people I admire whose opinion on certain subjects do not agree with my own - the important point is the subject matter to which the opinion is directed and how it is expressed. Plus, it's ironic that you mention the 'art of living' as I am currently studying Arts and Humanities with the OU!

However, I'm an atheist and Folau, through his religious based ignorance reminds me why I am. 

See you in hell 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

maybe this hirst guy should do his talking on a rugby pitch.  thats usually how its done in rugby league.  he looks a big unit, if he catches folau im sure he could put a good hit on him

Problem is Hirst is a low level player ,just because he’s gay means nothing to me ; he’s an average player. I’m not intending to put the man down ; I’m just looking at it from a Rugby perspective rather than one of sexuality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

So just an out and out attempt at provocation essentially? Interesting, homophobia isn’t a new thing and not even new to our game - where were you all then asking for every club to come out in force? And worst of all many seem to want to do it to provoke a reaction from Folau rather than actually support LGBTQ+ community. Bandwagon springs to mind. 

If it sparks a reaction out of him then good, that's a bonus. My suggestion was primarily to show him that RL  stands firmly against his homophobic stance, and unlike him the game welcomes people from the LGBT community.

I have several friends and colleagues who are gay including one who is a Saints season ticket holder. She said that while not happy about him coming the SL she's more disappointed by the Dragons than the RFL themselves for accepting his registration. She'll no doubt be voicing her opinions to Folau from the terraces when he comes to Saints.

St.Helens - The Home of Rugby Champions

Saints Men's team - Triple Champions & Double Winners ; Saints Women's team - Treble Winners ; Thatto Heath - National Conference Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

ok do a lie detector test on every super league player and ask them if they think being gay is ok.

ban every single one who fails.  

This is a really, really odd argument.. 

People can hold whatever views they want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

I'm instinctively uncomfortable with banning Folau based on the tweets and comments he's made. He essentially gave a long list of behaviours he believes to be sins and said people practicing them were going to hell. He wasn't attacking an individual, or making threats, it was all very general. I don't see anything that really merits being banned from playing our sport, or any other. It's distasteful, but I don't like the idea of banning him from the sport simply because he has some hardline, archaic religious beliefs.

I think I'd feel differently if he'd singled out an individual for those comments, for example if he'd tweeted an openly gay player and told him he was going to hell. That would feel different, like a personal attack on someone who hadn't done anything to merit it.

All that said, I wouldn't want him playing for my team, and I don't particularly want him playing RL. It would have been better for all concerned if Bernard Guasch had left this one alone.

Decent analysis there, pretty much where I am (more or less) and I’d rather have they hadn’t gone here in the first place. 
It’s definitely a bit of a moral maze because let’s imagine he had those views but didn’t air them publicly, would that be acceptable? Do we start making players sign some sort of declaration about what they do or don’t believe in?

But at the same time, not naming an individual doesn’t mean he’s free to express any views.  If he’d said ‘I hate blacks’ that wouldn’t be picking on an individual but still wrong and unacceptable. (Obviously perhaps)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since people are quoting what others have said and misquoting what Folau himself has said; here's a couple of quotes from him.

"My response to the question is what I believe God's plan is for all sinners, according to my understanding of my Bible teachings, specifically 1 Corinthians 6:9–10

"Since my social media posts were publicised, it has been suggested that I am homophobic and bigoted and that I have a problem with gay people. This could not be further from the truth. I fronted the cover of the Star Observer magazine to show my support for the Bingham Cup, which is an international gay rugby competition for both men and women. I believe in inclusion. In my heart, I know I do not have any phobia towards anyone." 

He's literally quoted as saying he doesn't have a problem with people who are gay and attributes his comments directly to religious scripts (not his own words which is important) yet some are saying Hardaker was forgiven because he 'showed remorse' and went on an 'educational course' - deary me, I know which one of them two I think said their comments in a massively ill judged manner and which one said them as a mindless homophobe but hey don't some of you let your halo/moral compass slide because...because he did the course, right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" it was not my intention to hurt anyone and I'll not be making further public comment on it " 

To me that's the end of it 

Unless others feel they need to make a point by continuing to make an issue of it , if that's the case then I'd be looking to question why and what their motives are ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, bobbruce said:

Keegan Hirst on BBC breakfast this morning could do with finding a more prominent job in the games for him when he finishes. 

Agreed. Hirst was highly eloquent and passionate.

Steve McNamara called him up prior to the announcement and it seems Hirst told him to fornicate off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

What he believes isn't the issue. Spouting his offensive hate filled propoganda is. 

So being homophobic isn't the issue 

Tell that to the rest of the thread 

He was initially asked the question  by one of his folle4rs

So he isn't allowed to answer his own beliefs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

Decent analysis there, pretty much where I am (more or less) and I’d rather have they hadn’t gone here in the first place. 
It’s definitely a bit of a moral maze because let’s imagine he had those views but didn’t air them publicly, would that be acceptable? Do we start making players sign some sort of declaration about what they do or don’t believe in?

But at the same time, not naming an individual doesn’t mean he’s free to express any views.  If he’d said ‘I hate blacks’ that wouldn’t be picking on an individual but still wrong and unacceptable. (Obviously perhaps)

But he hasn't said he ' hates ' anyone 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Johnoco said:

I was using an example, not saying he said that. 

I know John , I was agreeing with you , but it seems many just don't seem to see that , you cannot control people's thoughts ,yes he made a public statement , be has said he won't do it again , but it seems some won't be happy unless he chops a keg of two of in remorse , absolute madness 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

So being homophobic isn't the issue 

Tell that to the rest of the thread 

He was initially asked the question  by one of his folle4rs

So he isn't allowed to answer his own beliefs 

How would anyone know a person's beliefs? I'm free to believe all sorts of racist, misogynistic stuff if I really was that way inclined and nobody would be any the wiser. 

If is started to spout propoganda endorsing those views, I can't be surprised if my employer has an issue with it. 

That is all that is happening here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CanadianRugger said:

Ahh the French!  Despite all of the outrage in the UK and Australia, I guarantee 100% that no one in Perpignan gives a ###### about what Folau said or did.  I grew up with Francos, they tend not to give a ###### about this sort of stuff, it's a cultural thing.

Let's face it, Catalans have been near the cellar the past few seasons and need the firepower.  They probably even got a discount on account of Israel's "baggage".  Smart rugby move.

Even here in Australia it's mostly manufactured outrage. The vast majority of your average punters (at least 70%) couldn't give a what some loony fundamentalist says.

Which leads to a more interesting question: How is it that people in such an extreme minority of political and philosophical thought have come to have so much power in society? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...