Jump to content

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

Free speech for folau too ?

OI i googled it disclusive isnt a word

I was using it to respond to the poster above.

Folau needs a capital.

Free speech never means freedom from consequences, does it? Folau can say and do what he likes. But he doesn't exist in a vacuum and he may find that his employment as a professional sportsmen is hindered, indeed has been hindered, by exercising that freedom.

  • Like 4

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, RMBJ said:

 

Tyson doesn't campaign for rape to be made legal. And a boxer is not employed in anything close to how a rugby player is. 

So morally you are happy with that . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

I see we're at the "let's ignore the protests that followed Mike Tyson throughout the rest of his professional career" stage.

Not ignoring it just surprised at some of the outlets that have associated with Tyson that then spit and wasps at Israel . I think the major problem most people have is the massive hypocrisy that people who jump on these trial by media band wagons have and never seem to have a decent excuse . I am happy to be honest and say I like my friends family and people who I like to get away with more than people who I don’t . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I must  say I am finding this thread rather depressing on the eve of a new season. The amount of defence and justification of Folau's hate speech surprises me, maybe it shouldn't.

The defences we have seen include freedom of speech, protecting his religious rights, PC gone mad, it's all an attack by do-gooders, many share his views, he didn't say anything bad, he offered to apologise, others have done other things, people are looking to be offended for others, and so on.

The bit that seems lacking from many of these posts making any kind of defence is the acknowledgement of the people that are the target of this hatred. Many LGBTQ+ people are still vulnerable in many parts of the world, including the UK, where we see regular homophobic attacks. But it can be much worse in other parts of the world where people can be thrown off buildings or stoned for being gay, often driven by a religious cult. But hey, its what they believe in. 

In the UK, people still have trouble 'coming out', still face prejudice and still fighting for their rights, usually to be treated like normal people. In the RL community we are meant to be inclusive and we use our sense of community for good, we work with vulnerable groups - and for us to go out and actively sign a non-RL player who has chosen to publicly spout hatred against gay people is a kick in the teeth for these people and the work that many of our clubs are doing. It's all well and good saying he is just quoting the bible, but they are now his words on his social media, it is no defence that somebody else said it first. He is telling gay people to repent, that they are sinning, freedom of speech allows him to do that, but I'm not sure why the game would go within 50 miles of him.

 

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Well I must  say I am finding this thread rather depressing on the eve of a new season. The amount of defence and justification of Folau's hate speech surprises me, maybe it shouldn't.

The defences we have seen include freedom of speech, protecting his religious rights, PC gone mad, it's all an attack by do-gooders, many share his views, he didn't say anything bad, he offered to apologise, others have done other things, people are looking to be offended for others, and so on.

The bit that seems lacking from many of these posts making any kind of defence is the acknowledgement of the people that are the target of this hatred. Many LGBTQ+ people are still vulnerable in many parts of the world, including the UK, where we see regular homophobic attacks. But it can be much worse in other parts of the world where people can be thrown off buildings or stoned for being gay, often driven by a religious cult. But hey, its what they believe in. 

In the UK, people still have trouble 'coming out', still face prejudice and still fighting for their rights, usually to be treated like normal people. In the RL community we are meant to be inclusive and we use our sense of community for good, we work with vulnerable groups - and for us to go out and actively sign a non-RL player who has chosen to publicly spout hatred against gay people is a kick in the teeth for these people and the work that many of our clubs are doing. It's all well and good saying he is just quoting the bible, but they are now his words on his social media, it is no defence that somebody else said it first. He is telling gay people to repent, that they are sinning, freedom of speech allows him to do that, but I'm not sure why the game would go within 50 miles of him.

 

Because he's a good rugby player 

And other rugby players have donr far far worse 

So 

Edited by aj1908
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A second point, which I intentionally wanted to keep separate, is on the 'we allow criminals to play RL' point.

I do think there is an important distinction here. And before I go further I will clarify that I am good with the RFL's position of not banning players like the NRL do - it leads to inconsistency, I am talking here about self-moderation by the clubs.

But if we accept that both have done wrong (the hypothetical player who has had a dog lick his balls, or been found guilty of drink driving) as well as Folau, there is an important point that what follows is very different. 

In every case of criminality we have seen the justice system take action, and people take their punishment where relevant. We believe in rehabilitation in this country, and in every case the player will show remorse, but we accept that players are human beings who are fallible and make mistakes and bad choices, get involved in bad stuff, and indeed carry out  bad acts.  But we always see remorse, apologies, and time served where appropriate. 

Where Folau differs is that if 'the game' finds his behaviour bad, he is not showing any remorse, he will happily do it again if he is allowed, and still very much holds those views. That is his prerogative, but that shows to me at least that he is not a person that is compatible with our game's values. 

As a game we should be forgiving, offering 2nd chances, helping with rehabilitation, but that is very different to what is happening here with Folau.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

Because he's a good rugby player 

And other rugby players have donr far far worse 

So 

see my below post about remorse, rehab, 2nd chances etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Poower Lad said:

So morally you are happy with that . 

Logical fallacies are your friend I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, aj1908 said:

So someone that actually commits a crime ks less of an offence than someone whose religion tells him something is a sin and repeats this 

Ok 

spacer.png

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is simple - for catalans and Folau to be accepted for their decisions etc what should be done is a statement form Catalans and endorsed by Falau that says the club recognise his right to his deeply held religious beliefs and they will not impinge on them, Falau recognises that they are his personal beliefs and are contrary to those of a large number of people. Subsequently whilst contracted to Catalans he has utmost professional respect for all the players and officials he will come into contact with and will be making no public statements on LBGTQ+ matters so don't even ask.

A media/disrepute clause better be in his contract

Then if he keeps his head down just gets on with his job playing rugby he can be judged on his performances on the pitch and no religious or lbgt+ person will feel their rights are being impinged upon.

IF he invites issues by evangelising on his beliefs then he has broken the clause and deserves what he gets (plus if  it is properly codified in advance Cats/SL will avoid possible legal dispute)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

I was using it to respond to the poster above.

Folau needs a capital.

Free speech never means freedom from consequences, does it? Folau can say and do what he likes. But he doesn't exist in a vacuum and he may find that his employment as a professional sportsmen is hindered, indeed has been hindered, by exercising that freedom.

So much of the Freedom of Speech battle is over the right to be homophobic, sexist, racist etc.  Such brave people fighting for our right to be these things.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SSoutherner said:

I think it is simple - for catalans and Folau to be accepted for their decisions etc what should be done is a statement form Catalans and endorsed by Falau that says the club recognise his right to his deeply held religious beliefs and they will not impinge on them, Falau recognises that they are his personal beliefs and are contrary to those of a large number of people. Subsequently whilst contracted to Catalans he has utmost professional respect for all the players and officials he will come into contact with and will be making no public statements on LBGTQ+ matters so don't even ask.

A media/disrepute clause better be in his contract

Then if he keeps his head down just gets on with his job playing rugby he can be judged on his performances on the pitch and no religious or lbgt+ person will feel their rights are being impinged upon.

IF he invites issues by evangelising on his beliefs then he has broken the clause and deserves what he gets (plus if  it is properly codified in advance Cats/SL will avoid possible legal dispute)

Yep spot on

There is a strict clause saying they can sack him for further comments 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dave T said:

So much of the Freedom of Speech battle is over the right to be homophobic, sexist, racist etc.  Such brave people fighting for our right to be these things.

Well that's exaggerating it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

Well that's exaggerating it 

I think I was pretty restrained and under-stating it quite a bit. 

We see so many Tommy Robinson supporters, for example, campaigning for our free speech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SSoutherner said:

Yes freedom of speech is not freedom to insult or incite bigotry

 

There are laws ensuring protection of religious beliefs 

If folau was.guilty of those.things he would've been criminally charged 

He wasn't 

As much as you believe he mightve been 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SSoutherner said:

Yes freedom of speech is not freedom to insult or incite bigotry

 

Unfortunately it is this is what I keep saying , you cannot pick and choose , read your history .

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dave T said:

I think I was pretty restrained and under-stating it quite a bit. 

We see so many Tommy Robinson supporters, for example, campaigning for our free speech.

Bottom line this helps Catalans win games 

He's guilty of nothing criminally unlike others 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dave T said:

A second point, which I intentionally wanted to keep separate, is on the 'we allow criminals to play RL' point.

I do think there is an important distinction here. And before I go further I will clarify that I am good with the RFL's position of not banning players like the NRL do - it leads to inconsistency, I am talking here about self-moderation by the clubs.

But if we accept that both have done wrong (the hypothetical player who has had a dog lick his balls, or been found guilty of drink driving) as well as Folau, there is an important point that what follows is very different. 

In every case of criminality we have seen the justice system take action, and people take their punishment where relevant. We believe in rehabilitation in this country, and in every case the player will show remorse, but we accept that players are human beings who are fallible and make mistakes and bad choices, get involved in bad stuff, and indeed carry out  bad acts.  But we always see remorse, apologies, and time served where appropriate. 

Where Folau differs is that if 'the game' finds his behaviour bad, he is not showing any remorse, he will happily do it again if he is allowed, and still very much holds those views. That is his prerogative, but that shows to me at least that he is not a person that is compatible with our game's values. 

As a game we should be forgiving, offering 2nd chances, helping with rehabilitation, but that is very different to what is happening here with Folau.

Thing is I used to look upon RL as a religion and would have literally died for the game , I have argued for RL on many platforms mostly against severely ignorant union bigots ; I never apologised to anyone about my deep felt beliefs and never will. Believe it or not Christianity is bigger than RL and I’m not surprised in the slightest that he is not apologising for his and others deep seated beliefs .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aj1908 said:

Bottom line this helps Catalans win games 

He's guilty of nothing criminally unlike others 

 

For many people this isn't thee bottom line. It has upset and angered them.

I'm not sure why you keep bringing criminality into this. It's weird.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Well I must  say I am finding this thread rather depressing on the eve of a new season. The amount of defence and justification of Folau's hate speech surprises me, maybe it shouldn't.

The defences we have seen include freedom of speech, protecting his religious rights, PC gone mad, it's all an attack by do-gooders, many share his views, he didn't say anything bad, he offered to apologise, others have done other things, people are looking to be offended for others, and so on.

The bit that seems lacking from many of these posts making any kind of defence is the acknowledgement of the people that are the target of this hatred. Many LGBTQ+ people are still vulnerable in many parts of the world, including the UK, where we see regular homophobic attacks. But it can be much worse in other parts of the world where people can be thrown off buildings or stoned for being gay, often driven by a religious cult. But hey, its what they believe in. 

In the UK, people still have trouble 'coming out', still face prejudice and still fighting for their rights, usually to be treated like normal people. In the RL community we are meant to be inclusive and we use our sense of community for good, we work with vulnerable groups - and for us to go out and actively sign a non-RL player who has chosen to publicly spout hatred against gay people is a kick in the teeth for these people and the work that many of our clubs are doing. It's all well and good saying he is just quoting the bible, but they are now his words on his social media, it is no defence that somebody else said it first. He is telling gay people to repent, that they are sinning, freedom of speech allows him to do that, but I'm not sure why the game would go within 50 miles of him.

 

On reflection, if you look back at the thread, there's a small handful of people who've made the overwhelming number of posts in this thread. Those few people are getting extraordinarily wound up with defending a hateful, but talented, player who really should be treated as unacceptable baggage regardless of that talent.  The overwhelming number of single and maybe 2-3 posts posters in this thread have been a bit mystified as to why he's being brought in.

So, usual story, those with the most extreme views making the loudest noise but making it seem like there's a lot of them.

  • Like 3

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Well I must  say I am finding this thread rather depressing on the eve of a new season. The amount of defence and justification of Folau's hate speech surprises me, maybe it shouldn't.

The defences we have seen include freedom of speech, protecting his religious rights, PC gone mad, it's all an attack by do-gooders, many share his views, he didn't say anything bad, he offered to apologise, others have done other things, people are looking to be offended for others, and so on.

The bit that seems lacking from many of these posts making any kind of defence is the acknowledgement of the people that are the target of this hatred. Many LGBTQ+ people are still vulnerable in many parts of the world, including the UK, where we see regular homophobic attacks. But it can be much worse in other parts of the world where people can be thrown off buildings or stoned for being gay, often driven by a religious cult. But hey, its what they believe in. 

In the UK, people still have trouble 'coming out', still face prejudice and still fighting for their rights, usually to be treated like normal people. In the RL community we are meant to be inclusive and we use our sense of community for good, we work with vulnerable groups - and for us to go out and actively sign a non-RL player who has chosen to publicly spout hatred against gay people is a kick in the teeth for these people and the work that many of our clubs are doing. It's all well and good saying he is just quoting the bible, but they are now his words on his social media, it is no defence that somebody else said it first. He is telling gay people to repent, that they are sinning, freedom of speech allows him to do that, but I'm not sure why the game would go within 50 miles of him.

 

I think you’re going slightly OTT here, practically  nobody has said what he said was ok. People have had different views on what the reaction should have been to him but I don’t recall anyone actually agreeing with him. Surely an important distinction?

Like you, I think they should have kept well clear.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, iangidds said:

Thing is I used to look upon RL as a religion and would have literally died for the game , I have argued for RL on many platforms mostly against severely ignorant union bigots ; I never apologised to anyone about my deep felt beliefs and never will. Believe it or not Christianity is bigger than RL and I’m not surprised in the slightest that he is not apologising for his and others deep seated beliefs .

He doesn't need to apologise. He has his views, that's for him to care about. 

Whether an RL club should hire somebody like that is the discussion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think I was pretty restrained and under-stating it quite a bit. 

We see so many Tommy Robinson supporters, for example, campaigning for our free speech.

And he should be allowed to speak

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SSoutherner said:

I think it is simple - for catalans and Folau to be accepted for their decisions etc what should be done is a statement form Catalans and endorsed by Falau that says the club recognise his right to his deeply held religious beliefs and they will not impinge on them, Falau recognises that they are his personal beliefs and are contrary to those of a large number of people. Subsequently whilst contracted to Catalans he has utmost professional respect for all the players and officials he will come into contact with and will be making no public statements on LBGTQ+ matters so don't even ask.

A media/disrepute clause better be in his contract

Then if he keeps his head down just gets on with his job playing rugby he can be judged on his performances on the pitch and no religious or lbgt+ person will feel their rights are being impinged upon.

IF he invites issues by evangelising on his beliefs then he has broken the clause and deserves what he gets (plus if  it is properly codified in advance Cats/SL will avoid possible legal dispute)

What you're suggesting is very logical.

Expecting someone to apologise for their religious beliefs would be inviting them to be hypocritical. He believes what he believes, and only he could change his beliefs.

But both he and the club must recognise that those beliefs, whatever they are, should not impinge on his role as a Rugby League player.

In a more general sense, I spent much of my earlier life campaigning against Rugby League being banned in various places around the world, and Rugby League players being victimised because they had played Rugby League.

One of our arguments always was that Rugby League is the most inclusive of sports, discriminating against no one. That includes gay people as well as people who might appear to have fundamental or even eccentric beliefs.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...