Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
General Rugby Discussion II
Options
Comments
-
Burkie1203 wrote: »
Tweet now deleted....that lad should have really waited a day or two before trying to stick the boot in.
I doubt he'll make close to $3m but he's going to raise a significant chunk of cash for his legal fees.0 -
Former Former wrote: »I don't think Folau said he deserves the money more than dying children.
Mitchell acting the prick there.
I don't think he did either but point still stands that his cause is far different from theirs. Obviously people have choice to donate or not but there's far better causes out there. You'd wonder why his church don't back him. I would have thought he would have saved a fair bit of money himself over the years too. Pretty sure it's cause he knows he will lose the case so wants to lose other people's money not his.0 -
Doesn't Ireland have something where your case can be of such constitutional importance that the government cover the legal cost??
And if so, I wonder if that route is available to Folau in aussieland0 -
Great news if you’re his lawyers. I’d say they’ll charge him through the gills0
-
I don't think he did either but point still stands that his cause is far different from theirs. Obviously people have choice to donate or not but there's far better causes out there.
It's crowdfunding. There are all sorts of stupid causes on there. If Jenny from Mullingar wants 10k to open a vegan cafe, do people call her out for taking money away from dying children?You'd wonder why his church don't back him. I would have thought he would have saved a fair bit of money himself over the years too. Pretty sure it's cause he knows he will lose the case so wants to lose other people's money not his.
He belongs to a very small church and I think his dad is the pastor/reverend/whatever - they probably don't have the resources and it would look very bad (and probably illegal) if dad was using church money to bail out his son.
He's 30 and he's never going to play rugby again, he won't be getting too much media work either. If he loses having spent all his money on legal fees, then what does he do? [yes, I know you'll all say, "well, he should have thought of that..."]0 -
Advertisement
-
Former Former wrote: »If he loses having spent all his money on legal fees, then what does he do?
God will provide.0 -
Former Former wrote: »He's 30 and he's never going to play rugby again, he won't be getting too much media work either. If he loses having spent all his money on legal fees, then what does he do? [yes, I know you'll all say, "well, he should have thought of that..."]
He'll probably tour as a pastor. He'd make a significant living in the states doing that sort of thing.0 -
Former Former wrote: »It's crowdfunding. There are all sorts of stupid causes on there. If Jenny from Mullingar wants 10k to open a vegan cafe, do people call her out for taking money away from dying children?
He belongs to a very small church and I think his dad is the pastor/reverend/whatever - they probably don't have the resources and it would look very bad (and probably illegal) if dad was using church money to bail out his son.
He's 30 and he's never going to play rugby again, he won't be getting too much media work either. If he loses having spent all his money on legal fees, then what does he do? [yes, I know you'll all say, "well, he should have thought of that..."]
Well even opening a cafe is better than "I was homophobic, breached my contract and got fired. Please help me pay may legal fees for a case I will lose anyways." Tbh the whole thing about fundraising for legal fees is bit of grey area but to do it for something like this just seems wrong. Well yeah if his career was that valuable to him he could have kept his views ptivate tbf. I don't have any sympathy for him0 -
-
Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »Squidge (from the video channel/subreddit) starting a gofundme in response to Folau's one.
That's absolutely pathetic.
"Israel Folau's intolerance will not be tolerated"
Does he not see the incredible hyprocrisy of that?0 -
Advertisement
-
Former Former wrote: »That's absolutely pathetic.
"Israel Folau's intolerance will not be tolerated"
Does he not see the incredible hyprocrisy of that?
Where's the hyocrisy? Nobody is obliged to tolerate intolerance. Intolerance to gay people vs intolerance to people with those views, not equivalent. Not by a long shot0 -
Former Former wrote: »That's absolutely pathetic.
"Israel Folau's intolerance will not be tolerated"
Does he not see the incredible hyprocrisy of that?
its not hypocrisy.... its a dichotomy.... huge difference.0 -
The language seems hypocritical but it makes sense to me.0
-
Where's the hyocrisy? Nobody is obliged to tolerate intolerance. Intolerance to gay people vs intolerance to people with those views, not equivalent. Not by a long shot
The principles are the same. This guy thinks/acts/feels differently to the majority so he must be ostracised as some sort of freak.
I'll keep saying this and people will keep conveniently ignoring it. Any Irish person over the age of 30 is old enough to remember a time when Folau's views on gays were widely accepted by pretty much everyone. The 'progressive' way of dealing with gays was just not to mention it or maybe a knowing nod and the liberal use of air quotes, e.g. Uncle David is visiting his "friend" Michael. That was as tolerant as it got.
If you think Folau is an absolute c*nt, remember to look in the mirror, or (depending on your age) tell your parents and grandparents that they're c*nts too.
So we've moved on, now we're all loving and tolerant and inclusive. Awesome.
Except we're not. We've just found different people to be intolerant of. So I'm going to stick a rainbow filter on my profile pic while I absolutely tear into a guy who's different in a different way.
Folau isn't a bad guy, he's not crazy and he's not going round Sydney beating up gays. He just missed the memo that we don't really believe in all that God and hell stuff any more. I would rather that he kept it to himself but I'd rather everyone kept their religions to themselves and that ain't going to happen any time soon.0 -
Former Former wrote: »The principles are the same. This guy thinks/acts/feels differently to the majority so he must be ostracised as some sort of freak.
I'll keep saying this and people will keep conveniently ignoring it. Any Irish person over the age of 30 is old enough to remember a time when Folau's views on gays were widely accepted by pretty much everyone. The 'progressive' way of dealing with gays was just not to mention it or maybe a knowing nod and the liberal use of air quotes, e.g. Uncle David is visiting his "friend" Michael. That was as tolerant as it got.
If you think Folau is an absolute c*nt, remember to look in the mirror, or (depending on your age) tell your parents and grandparents that they're c*nts too.
So we've moved on, now we're all loving and tolerant and inclusive. Awesome.
Except we're not. We've just found different people to be intolerant of. So I'm going to stick a rainbow filter on my profile pic while I absolutely tear into a guy who's different in a different way.
Folau isn't a bad guy, he's not crazy and he's not going round Sydney beating up gays. He just missed the memo that we don't really believe in all that God and hell stuff any more. I would rather that he kept it to himself but I'd rather everyone kept their religions to themselves and that ain't going to happen any time soon.
It's because society has moved on that his views arent being tolerated. Don't think anyone needs reminding how awful recent history was for gay people particularly in Ireland. He's not a victim, he chooses to hold these views. He's convinced these views are part of his faith but many Christians get by without holding similar views. Should we eauslly criticise other religions and people who hold those views? Of course. Fact is he's a very prominent sportsman and that's why he's getting the flak. I can't see how tolerating someone who views gay people as lesser, unequal and going to hell should be treated as "live and let be." Live your life the way you want it but if your opinions are harmful to others people will call you out for it.0 -
Former Former wrote: »The principles are the same. This guy thinks/acts/feels differently to the majority so he must be ostracised as some sort of freak.
I'll keep saying this and people will keep conveniently ignoring it. Any Irish person over the age of 30 is old enough to remember a time when Folau's views on gays were widely accepted by pretty much everyone. The 'progressive' way of dealing with gays was just not to mention it or maybe a knowing nod and the liberal use of air quotes, e.g. Uncle David is visiting his "friend" Michael. That was as tolerant as it got.
If you think Folau is an absolute c*nt, remember to look in the mirror, or (depending on your age) tell your parents and grandparents that they're c*nts too.
So we've moved on, now we're all loving and tolerant and inclusive. Awesome.
Except we're not. We've just found different people to be intolerant of. So I'm going to stick a rainbow filter on my profile pic while I absolutely tear into a guy who's different in a different way.
Folau isn't a bad guy, he's not crazy and he's not going round Sydney beating up gays. He just missed the memo that we don't really believe in all that God and hell stuff any more. I would rather that he kept it to himself but I'd rather everyone kept their religions to themselves and that ain't going to happen any time soon.
If you act like a c*nt you will get treated like a c*nt. End of really. If you repeatedly insult people they will get pissed off. At no point did we decide to be nice to those who repeatedly insult us.
Others behaving badly in the past does not excuse Falou now. Near as I can tell my granny has never gone around telling gay people they are going to hell.
Anyhow I don't think you are being very tolerant people calling Falou a c*nt. Just because we act different to you.0 -
Former Former wrote: »The principles are the same. This guy thinks/acts/feels differently to the majority so he must be ostracised as some sort of freak.
I'll keep saying this and people will keep conveniently ignoring it. Any Irish person over the age of 30 is old enough to remember a time when Folau's views on gays were widely accepted by pretty much everyone. The 'progressive' way of dealing with gays was just not to mention it or maybe a knowing nod and the liberal use of air quotes, e.g. Uncle David is visiting his "friend" Michael. That was as tolerant as it got.
If you think Folau is an absolute c*nt, remember to look in the mirror, or (depending on your age) tell your parents and grandparents that they're c*nts too.
So we've moved on, now we're all loving and tolerant and inclusive. Awesome.
Except we're not. We've just found different people to be intolerant of. So I'm going to stick a rainbow filter on my profile pic while I absolutely tear into a guy who's different in a different way.
Folau isn't a bad guy, he's not crazy and he's not going round Sydney beating up gays. He just missed the memo that we don't really believe in all that God and hell stuff any more. I would rather that he kept it to himself but I'd rather everyone kept their religions to themselves and that ain't going to happen any time soon.
I haven't really weighed in on this at all but this is an absolutely dreadful argument. Is it also acceptable to be racist because it was the norm a couple generations ago too?
Society moves on for a reason. Thank **** (or God if you prefer) for that.0 -
I haven't really weighed in on this at all but this is an absolutely dreadful argument. Is it also acceptable to be racist because it was the norm a couple generations ago too?
Society moves on for a reason. Thank **** (or God if you prefer) for that.
And religions also found a reason to justify this and slavery for example. Religious views alone can't be a universal justification0 -
Former Former wrote: »The principles are the same. This guy thinks/acts/feels differently to the majority so he must be ostracised as some sort of freak.
I'll keep saying this and people will keep conveniently ignoring it. Any Irish person over the age of 30 is old enough to remember a time when Folau's views on gays were widely accepted by pretty much everyone. The 'progressive' way of dealing with gays was just not to mention it or maybe a knowing nod and the liberal use of air quotes, e.g. Uncle David is visiting his "friend" Michael. That was as tolerant as it got.
If you think Folau is an absolute c*nt, remember to look in the mirror, or (depending on your age) tell your parents and grandparents that they're c*nts too.
So we've moved on, now we're all loving and tolerant and inclusive. Awesome.
Except we're not. We've just found different people to be intolerant of. So I'm going to stick a rainbow filter on my profile pic while I absolutely tear into a guy who's different in a different way.
Folau isn't a bad guy, he's not crazy and he's not going round Sydney beating up gays. He just missed the memo that we don't really believe in all that God and hell stuff any more. I would rather that he kept it to himself but I'd rather everyone kept their religions to themselves and that ain't going to happen any time soon.
yeah this is all wrong.
i know youre probably still just presenting the contrarian view, but this is so wide of the mark.. its presenting a "changing of views" as though its fashion and, sure it was grand when we held those views a few years ago, so go easy on folau cos hes just a bit behind the times.....
The problem with that argument is that it doesnt at all recognise the damage and danger those views hold... and worst still, it doesnt recognise the damage and hurt not challanging those views also causes. The LGBT community suffer suicide rates of generally between 150% - 300% more than their hetro alternatives. They obviously suffer physical abuse, attacks, mental absue, depression etc at higher rates because of who they are.
Studies have shown that LGBT inclusive policies lowers all these factors when people are accepted for who they are. Folaus views flies in the face of this. Those views segregate LGBT people as being abhorrent and something to be shameful of.
Those views should never be accepted.
Those views should always be challenged.
While these views are contained within christian doctrine, its only the extreme fundamentalists who espouse and preach those old testament views (see west baptist church).
But thankfully the main christian body espouses jesus words in Matthew 22, 34-40 as being a better life policy to live by:[34] But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together.
[35] Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
[36] Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
[37] Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
[38] This is the first and great commandment.
[39] And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
[40] On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.0 -
sydthebeat wrote: »yeah this is all wrong.
i know youre probably still just presenting the contrarian view, but this is so wide of the mark.. its presenting a "changing of views" as though its fashion and, sure it was grand when we held those views a few years ago, so go easy on folau cos hes just a bit behind the times.....
The problem with that argument is that it doesnt at all recognise the damage and danger those views hold... and worst still, it doesnt recognise the damage and hurt not challanging those views also causes. The LGBT community suffer suicide rates of generally between 150% - 300% more than their hetro alternatives. They obviously suffer physical abuse, attacks, mental absue, depression etc at higher rates because of who they are.
Studies have shown that LGBT inclusive policies lowers all these factors when people are accepted for who they are. Folaus views flies in the face of this. Those views segregate LGBT people as being abhorrent and something to be shameful of.
Those views should never be accepted.
Those views should always be challenged.
While these views are contained within christian doctrine, its only the extreme fundamentalists who espouse and preach those old testament views (see west baptist church).
But thankfully the main christian body espouses jesus words in Matthew 22, 34-40 as being a better life policy to live by:
Mother of god....
Syd is a priest!!0 -
Advertisement
-
Sorry FF, but that post is wrong in so many ways. People are passing judgement on Folau for hating on other people. What he is doing is demonstrably damaging to other people. Those that he is judging are simply not hurting others. A lot of this is live and let live as long as you aren't hurting anyone. He is hurting people. Likely lots of people. His hate speech encourages others to do the same. So hes being called out. As he should be. Not because of the belief, but because of the damage that his actions have done and will continue to do. He can be homophobic all he wants, but once he starts doing damage to others he can just f*** right off. And that's exactly what society as a whole should say to him.0
-
sydthebeat wrote: »yeah this is all wrong.
i know youre probably still just presenting the contrarian view, but this is so wide of the mark.. its presenting a "changing of views" as though its fashion and, sure it was grand when we held those views a few years ago, so go easy on folau cos hes just a bit behind the times.....
The problem with that argument is that it doesnt at all recognise the damage and danger those views hold... and worst still, it doesnt recognise the damage and hurt not challanging those views also causes. The LGBT community suffer suicide rates of generally between 150% - 300% more than their hetro alternatives. They obviously suffer physical abuse, attacks, mental absue, depression etc at higher rates because of who they are.
Studies have shown that LGBT inclusive policies lowers all these factors when people are accepted for who they are. Folaus views flies in the face of this. Those views segregate LGBT people as being abhorrent and something to be shameful of.
Those views should never be accepted.
Those views should always be challenged.
Absolutely they should. My only objection is the way in which they are being challenged.
I don't like Folau's beliefs. Nevertheless, they are his beliefs. Someone up above said that he chooses to have these beliefs. That's not far off saying someone chooses to be gay, it's completely wrong. Folau was raised as a Mormon (according to Wiki anyway) and is now part of this pentecostal church so this is what he's been hearing all his life. It's part of who he is.
The question then becomes, do we try to understand who he is and where he's coming from, or do we dismiss him as a hate-filled lunatic who deserves to lose his job and all his money?sydthebeat wrote: »While these views are contained within christian doctrine, its only the extreme fundamentalists who espouse and preach those old testament views (see west baptist church).
But thankfully the main christian body espouses jesus words in Matthew 22, 34-40 as being a better life policy to live by:
I keep reading this and it's, as you might say yourself, yeah, this is all wrong.
Catholic teaching remains that gays go to hell. They have a little get-out clause which says that being gay isn't a sin, so long as you are chaste and abstain from sex, which coincidentally is exactly what Folau says.
Yeah Pope Francis came out with some nice soundbites about Jesus loving everyone, but he didn't actually do anything to follow through. Papal infalliblity gives him unlimited and unchallenged power to change the church position - but hasn't done so, that can only be because he doesn't want to.
So my question is, what are people doing to challenge that?
How many posters who are attacking Folau got married in a Catholic church? How many had their kids baptised? How many let their kids learn religion in school? Go to mass, accept the Eucharist? Why do we still have the f**king Angelus on TV?
If Folau's beliefs are so abhorrent, why does the majority of Irish society tacitly endorse them?0 -
Sorry FF, but that post is wrong in so many ways. People are passing judgement on Folau for hating on other people. What he is doing is demonstrably damaging to other people. Those that he is judging are simply not hurting others. A lot of this is live and let live as long as you aren't hurting anyone. He is hurting people. Likely lots of people. His hate speech encourages others to do the same. So hes being called out. As he should be. Not because of the belief, but because of the damage that his actions have done and will continue to do. He can be homophobic all he wants, but once he starts doing damage to others he can just f*** right off. And that's exactly what society as a whole should say to him.
You're not listening to my point.
He doesn't think he's hurting anyone. He believes that he's helping them. He believes it's his Christian duty to spread the word and save them from an eternity of damnation.
That's where he's coming from. I think that as a supposedly tolerant society, we should be trying a little harder to understand that.0 -
Former Former wrote: »The principles are the same. This guy thinks/acts/feels differently to the majority so he must be ostracised as some sort of freak.
I'll keep saying this and people will keep conveniently ignoring it. Any Irish person over the age of 30 is old enough to remember a time when Folau's views on gays were widely accepted by pretty much everyone. The 'progressive' way of dealing with gays was just not to mention it or maybe a knowing nod and the liberal use of air quotes, e.g. Uncle David is visiting his "friend" Michael. That was as tolerant as it got.
If you think Folau is an absolute c*nt, remember to look in the mirror, or (depending on your age) tell your parents and grandparents that they're c*nts too.
So we've moved on, now we're all loving and tolerant and inclusive. Awesome.
Except we're not. We've just found different people to be intolerant of. So I'm going to stick a rainbow filter on my profile pic while I absolutely tear into a guy who's different in a different way.
Folau isn't a bad guy, he's not crazy and he's not going round Sydney beating up gays. He just missed the memo that we don't really believe in all that God and hell stuff any more. I would rather that he kept it to himself but I'd rather everyone kept their religions to themselves and that ain't going to happen any time soon.
I think you are quite wide of the mark here mate.
Modern perception of homosexuality is the righting of a very long standing wrong. I don't accept that this is up for debate at all. I wouldn't even indulge a debate on the matter because to do so in my mind would be to disrespect people purely because of their sexuality. We need to move beyond the idea that there are two sides to this, there are not and no religious beliefs can change that fact.
Women gaining the vote was a righting of a very long standing wrong. I think after women gained the vote - those who continued to condemn that really highlighted exactly the type of person that they are.
Folau absolutely is a bad guy. His words (which are based in either prejudice or make-believe, take your pick) are a genuine threat to the homosexual community. People like Folau will drape themselves in his prejudice and use it to persecute or commit violence.
We are justifiably intolerant of a lot of things in society, this is one of them.Former Former wrote: »He doesn't think he's hurting anyone.
I personally don't believe this, I think he knows exactly what he is doing - but either way, ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law nor in the eyes of society.
I appreciate the argument you are trying to make - I just think we are fundamentally beyond this being a discussion. Religion is categorically on the wrong side of morality, decency and society on this one and this needs to be made clear.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »I think you are quite wide of the mark here mate.
Modern perception of homosexuality is the righting of a very long standing wrong. I don't accept that this is up for debate at all.
No-one is debating it.0 -
Former Former wrote: »Absolutely they should. My only objection is the way in which they are being challenged.
I don't like Folau's beliefs. Nevertheless, they are his beliefs. Someone up above said that he chooses to have these beliefs. That's not far off saying someone chooses to be gay, it's completely wrong. Folau was raised as a Mormon (according to Wiki anyway) and is now part of this pentecostal church so this is what he's been hearing all his life. It's part of who he is.
The question then becomes, do we try to understand who he is and where he's coming from, or do we dismiss him as a hate-filled lunatic who deserves to lose his job and all his money?
I keep reading this and it's, as you might say yourself, yeah, this is all wrong.
Catholic teaching remains that gays go to hell. They have a little get-out clause which says that being gay isn't a sin, so long as you are chaste and abstain from sex, which coincidentally is exactly what Folau says.
Yeah Pope Francis came out with some nice soundbites about Jesus loving everyone, but he didn't actually do anything to follow through. Papal infalliblity gives him unlimited and unchallenged power to change the church position - but hasn't done so, that can only be because he doesn't want to.
So my question is, what are people doing to challenge that?
How many posters who are attacking Folau got married in a Catholic church? How many had their kids baptised? How many let their kids learn religion in school?
If Folau's beliefs are so abhorrent, why does the majority of Irish society tacitly endorse them?
Always the "wrong" way to protest. I hear that line a lot. Falou's issue was airing his view which you repeatedly ignore.
Go start insulting your colleagues. Then take a court case when you inevitably get fired. Tell us how you get on. Nothing different than with Falou.
I don't care if someone hates gay people. However he went and insulted colleagues and fans and is facing the obvious consequences.0 -
Former Former wrote: »Catholic teaching remains that gays go to hell. They have a little get-out clause which says that being gay isn't a sin, so long as you are chaste and abstain from sex, which coincidentally is exactly what Folau says.
It's basically, you can be gay all you want, but you can't have gay sex.
Coincidentally, this is exactly how many people see Folau. He's free to be a homophobic bigot all he wants, as long as he doesn't actually come out and say it/trumpet it about on Twitter...
... oh wait. That's exactly what he did. What's good for the goose, etc.0 -
Former Former wrote: »Sorry FF, but that post is wrong in so many ways. People are passing judgement on Folau for hating on other people. What he is doing is demonstrably damaging to other people. Those that he is judging are simply not hurting others. A lot of this is live and let live as long as you aren't hurting anyone. He is hurting people. Likely lots of people. His hate speech encourages others to do the same. So hes being called out. As he should be. Not because of the belief, but because of the damage that his actions have done and will continue to do. He can be homophobic all he wants, but once he starts doing damage to others he can just f*** right off. And that's exactly what society as a whole should say to him.
You're not listening to my point.
He doesn't think he's hurting anyone. He believes that he's helping them. He believes it's his Christian duty to spread the word and save them from an eternity of damnation.
That's where he's coming from. I think that as a supposedly tolerant society, we should be trying a little harder to understand that.
Nope, sorry. I included the word demonstrably there for a reason. Its has been proven that what Folau does is actively harmful to others. It's not a matter of belief, simply a matter of fact. He was given ample opportunity to revise his behaviour and chose, yes chose, not to. His beliefs are not the issue here (sure for some they are, but not the ARU). He continued to be employed, paid and selected to play despite him publicly broadcasting his opinions.
His actions have led to all of this. His actions are things that he consciously chooses to do, and can consciously choose not to do. His beliefs are things that he has the ability to challenge and change should he choose to do so. In the modern world there is absolutely no shortage of opportunities for people to review their beliefs, especially when those beliefs are actively harmful to others. Absolutely none of these things are equivalent to homosexuality or other LGTB+ situations. They aren't even close IMO.
Hes hurting people. Anyone who is hurting people, be that physically or emotionally, should 100% be called out on it. Anyone who consciously chooses to continue hurting people having being given every opportunity to stop should suffer consequences for that.
Hiding behind a religion and a belief isn't good enough anymore. Nor should it be. Hurting others is wrong. There really is no additional layers of complexity here. If he wants to preach this stuff in a church where those there believe what he believe he can do so all he wants. If he starts doing so publicly to the detriment of others then hes just hurting people. End of. And I say that as someone who uses the "truth is somewhere in the middle" line almost daily.0 -
Former Former wrote: »
So my question is, what are people doing to challenge that?
seriously???
have you not seen the absolute cliff-fall decline in church going?
have you not seen the over whelming ass kicking those conservative views have gotten in recent referendums?
there is a serious ground swell, in this country at least, against those conservative views... especially among the older age group that would be considered most conservative.
the church in its current guise is dying a death here in ireland0 -
Advertisement
-
This is the rugby forum. This is not the place for general discussion of societal issues.
Can we get back to rugby related issues please?0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement