Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
General Discussion >> General Board >> Folau vs Yassmin
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1562056827

Message started by freediver on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 6:40pm

Title: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 6:40pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 5:28pm:

mothra wrote on Jul 1st, 2019 at 8:26pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 1st, 2019 at 8:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 1st, 2019 at 8:18pm:

mothra wrote on Jul 1st, 2019 at 6:48pm:
I'm still amazed at the outrage on Folau'ss behalf by the very same mob calling for the head of Yassmin Abdel-Mageid.

She didn't say anyone was going to hell either. She just asked us to be compassionate.



yes but she is muslim ... how dare she ask middle aged white men to do anything
She stood up for her religious beliefs like falou. She even went as far as to tell us that Sharia is great for females? Pity she had to use ANZAC Day as a platform to have a go at our soldiers.


She did absolutely none of that.


;D She absolutely did.


She told us that Islam was the most feminine religion. Sounds more like mocking religious beliefs than standing up for them. People mocked her for being an idiot, not for being a Muslim.

The usual suspects here whined about how criticising her for saying stupid poo was restricting her freedom of speech. But when the tables were turned and Folau was actually fired, they changed their tune. The hypocrisy of the apologists knows no limits.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Captain Caveman on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:44pm
Well done.

👏👏👏

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:45pm
What Yassmin said and did, particularly her claim that Islam is the most feminist religion, was absurd, controversial and unfamiliar. Pretty much the definition of newsworthy.

What Folau said was completely uninteresting. Everyone already knows where gays go when they die. It was only the hysterical, cowardly and most likely illegal conspiracy to get him fired that made him newsworthy. He has handled the situation with a quiet dignity, sticking to his position and calmly going about seeking justice.

Pretty much the opposite of Yassmin. Watching her dig herself in deeper with every comment was like watching a slow motion train wreck, finally ending with a crescendo of her blaming everyone but herself for the stupid poo she pulled. She tried to do a Kim Kardashian, but was totally unprepared for the response and she refused to learn from any of her mistakes along the way. She fled to London, tail between her legs, still blaming others.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:55pm
You are kidding me. 

Finally, it is clear...you are a Happy Clapping OT Bible Bashing homophobic devotee.  I seriously have and by a large margin overestimated you.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Is there anything in the Old Testament you disagree with Effendi?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Sprintcyclist on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:12pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:45pm:
What Yassmin said and did, particularly her claim that Islam is the most feminist religion, was absurd, controversial and unfamiliar. Pretty much the definition of newsworthy.

What Folau said was completely uninteresting. Everyone already knows where gays go when they die. It was only the hysterical, cowardly and most likely illegal conspiracy to get him fired that made him newsworthy. He has handled the situation with a quiet dignity, sticking to his position and calmly going about seeking justice.

Pretty much the opposite of Yassmin. Watching her dig herself in deeper with every comment was like watching a slow motion train wreck, finally ending with a crescendo of her blaming everyone but herself for the stupid poo she pulled. She tried to do a Kim Kardashian, but was totally unprepared for the response and she refused to learn from any of her mistakes along the way. She fled to London, tail between her legs, still blaming others.



Quote:
.........  He has handled the situation with a quiet dignity, sticking to his position       .......


I have grown up and been with these people for decades.
What you have said is exactly what they are.

They are quietly spoken, honest, gentle, loving people.
Whenever they speak, be quiet and listen intently.

They are a beautiful people.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:33pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 6:40pm:
The usual suspects here whined about how criticising her for saying stupid poo was restricting her freedom of speech.



I'm calling bullshit on that claim. You're full of it FD.

Don't you think it's about time you sought professional help

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Mr Hammer on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:41pm
I heard Yasmin is in Australia right now. Hanging around like a fly to a turd. That silly head with it's bright red lipstick and s hit covering it's hair just makes one want to punch it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:45pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:41pm:
I heard Yasmin is in Australia right now. Hanging around like a fly to a turd. That silly head with it's bright red lipstick and s hit covering it's hair just makes one want to punch it.



I, for one, am not surprised that you would get your jollies by punching a woman for voicing her opinion.

you're one of the crusaders for free speech aren't you? :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:46pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:55pm:
You are kidding me. 

Finally, it is clear...you are a Happy Clapping OT Bible Bashing homophobic devotee.  I seriously have and by a large margin overestimated you.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Is there anything in the Old Testament you disagree with Effendi?


Relax Aussie. I am not saying I agree with Folau. Just that everyone has heard it before.


Quote:
They are a beautiful people.


Are you talking about Tongans?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:50pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:55pm:
You are kidding me. 

Finally, it is clear...you are a Happy Clapping OT Bible Bashing homophobic devotee.  I seriously have and by a large margin overestimated you.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Is there anything in the Old Testament you disagree with Effendi?


Come on Effendi. Telling me to 'relax' is just silly.

Tell us please.....where are the Poofs going when they pass?

You said you knew.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:53pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:46pm:
Relax Aussie. I am not saying I agree with Folau. Just that everyone has heard it before.



no need to back down FD. You should grow a set of balls and stand by your beliefs. You made the claim, now stick to it. Don't pretend you said something else when it is so plainly obvious what you said.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:04pm

Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Where, Effendi?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:30pm
This is even stupider than when you 'caught' me saying that contracts are an invention.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Raven on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:53pm

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So when she said Islam was the most feminist religion, she was going by what she saw around her in Saudi Arabia at the time?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:11pm
Manus, Nauru, Palestine. Lest we forget.

Six words.

Ban them, kill them, cesterete them.

Feel like answering a question, Freediver?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:14pm

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:12pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:45pm:
What Yassmin said and did, particularly her claim that Islam is the most feminist religion, was absurd, controversial and unfamiliar. Pretty much the definition of newsworthy.

What Folau said was completely uninteresting. Everyone already knows where gays go when they die. It was only the hysterical, cowardly and most likely illegal conspiracy to get him fired that made him newsworthy. He has handled the situation with a quiet dignity, sticking to his position and calmly going about seeking justice.

Pretty much the opposite of Yassmin. Watching her dig herself in deeper with every comment was like watching a slow motion train wreck, finally ending with a crescendo of her blaming everyone but herself for the stupid poo she pulled. She tried to do a Kim Kardashian, but was totally unprepared for the response and she refused to learn from any of her mistakes along the way. She fled to London, tail between her legs, still blaming others.



Quote:
.........  He has handled the situation with a quiet dignity, sticking to his position       .......


I have grown up and been with these people for decades.
What you have said is exactly what they are.

They are quietly spoken, honest, gentle, loving people.
Whenever they speak, be quiet and listen intently.

They are a beautiful people.


They're tinted.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:20pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:46pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:55pm:
You are kidding me. 

Finally, it is clear...you are a Happy Clapping OT Bible Bashing homophobic devotee.  I seriously have and by a large margin overestimated you.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Is there anything in the Old Testament you disagree with Effendi?


Relax Aussie. I am not saying I agree with Folau. Just that everyone has heard it before.

[quote]They are a beautiful people.


Are you talking about Tongans?[/quote]

I think he was, FD.

Where do they go when they die?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:39pm
My first response was to laugh...


Of course Yassmin had the right to say Islam was the most feminist religion and the most peaceful on earth......

The ribald laughter came from the actual content of the statements she was entitled to make.... and that kitchen was too hot for her... poor darling...

Meantime big, butch Israel is fighting his critics - and just to remind you - nobody sacked Yassmin for her vapid comments .... she just couldn't stand the heat of the walls of laughter...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:44pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 8:46pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:55pm:
You are kidding me. 

Finally, it is clear...you are a Happy Clapping OT Bible Bashing homophobic devotee.  I seriously have and by a large margin overestimated you.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Is there anything in the Old Testament you disagree with Effendi?


Relax Aussie. I am not saying I agree with Folau. Just that everyone has heard it before.

[quote]They are a beautiful people.


Are you talking about Tongans?[/quote]

Very Tongan in cheek, though.....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:45pm

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So Islam has nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky - who'd 've thunk it?

Drink two coffees after waking up before opening mouth .....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:40am

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.


Or like you.

RA won't/can't replace Folau ... they haven't got the depth of talent.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Sir Spot of Borg on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:42am

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:45pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So Islam has nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky - who'd 've thunk it?

Drink two coffees after waking up before opening mouth .....


I see . . . . .  so knowing her religion makes all the difference in interpreting what she says? Muslims not allowed to be taken at face value?

Spot

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:45am

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.


Exactly.

Why isn't he following the Christian doctrine?

"If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.

"And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well."




I don't think this guy is a Christian at all.

I think he's just a greedy little attention whore, using religion to get what he wants.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:47am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:42am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:45pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So Islam has nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky - who'd 've thunk it?

Drink two coffees after waking up before opening mouth .....


I see . . . . .  so knowing her religion makes all the difference in interpreting what she says? Muslims not allowed to be taken at face value?

Spot


Where did I say that?

All I did was say that both Christianity and Islam hold to the idea of an invisible man in the sky - so attacking Folau on that basis was absurd...

Sometimes your thinking is abstruse.... and seems to perpetually seek victimhood for specified groups when you should be looking at truly equal treatment...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Sir Spot of Borg on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:00pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:42am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:45pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So Islam has nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky - who'd 've thunk it?

Drink two coffees after waking up before opening mouth .....


I see . . . . .  so knowing her religion makes all the difference in interpreting what she says? Muslims not allowed to be taken at face value?

Spot


Where did I say that?

All I did was say that both Christianity and Islam hold to the idea of an invisible man in the sky - so attacking Folau on that basis was absurd...

Sometimes your thinking is abstruse.... and seems to perpetually seek victimhood for specified groups when you should be looking at truly equal treatment...


She didnt quote from the koran though. She was victimised because ppl KNOW shes muslim. Falau on the other hand is pushing his religion at ppl.

Spot

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Yadda on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:03pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:

It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work [AND ON].....


POST OF THE DAY.






Yadda said....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1557844695/0#0

Quote:

QUESTION;
Isn't free and open [public] debate meant to be     A CONTEST OF IDEAS !?

....where every folly can be exposed ?


And isn't that, precisely why such debate is prohibited, in a political state like the People's Republic of China today ?




Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:13pm
Folau is a hate propagandist and a bogus Christian. 99.99% of Christians are bogus.


Quote:
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

― Mahatma Gandhi 

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Yadda on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:22pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:42am:

Muslims not allowed to be taken at face value?

Spot



To do so, is only for the terminally naive,     ...imo.



Why so ?

All followers of ISLAM,        ....are two faced.

Proof ?

Read on.



.



"ISLAM ES PAZ"


IMAGE.....



Everyone knows that true ISLAM, is a religion of peace.

/sarc off




.




IMAGE.....


Ali Kadri - Islamic Council of Queensland vice-president,
features in The Mosque Next Door on SBS.





Quote:

"There's no underlying religious text or reasons why [moslems] go out and kill people......"

- Ali Kadri
------- >
https://www.northernstar.com.au/news/we-wont-stop-terrorist-attacks-by-blaming-islam/3259588/




.




"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29


"Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred...."
Koran 58.22


"O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers."
Koran 9.23


"....take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends....
......he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them."
Koran 5.51


"Fighting [against disbelievers] is prescribed for you, and [if] ye dislike it.....Allah knoweth, and ye know not."
Koran 2.216


"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123


"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111


"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves....."
Koran 48.29


"There is for you an excellent example (to follow) in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people: "We are clear of you and of whatever ye worship besides Allah: we have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred for ever,- unless ye believe in Allah and Him alone"....."
Koran 60:4



.



EXAMPLE, MOSLEM DECEIT;

IMAGE...


Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami



Quote:

How Circumstance Dictates Islamic Behavior

January 18, 2012

Preach Peace When Weak, Wage War When Strong

"...all notions of peace with non-Muslims are based on circumstance.

When Muslims are weak, they should be peaceful; when strong, they should go on the offensive."

Sheikh Yassir al-Burhami - an ISLAMIC scholar and Egyptian Salafi leader
http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/how-circumstance-dictates-islamic-behavior/




.





EXAMPLE, MOSLEM DECEIT;


Quote:

Live in peace till strong enough to wage jihad, says UK Deoband scholar to Muslims

London, Sept.8 [2007]

A Deobandi scholar believes Muslims should preach peace till they are strong enough to undertake a jihad, or a holy war.

Justice Muhammad Taqi Usmani was quoted by the BBC as saying that Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practise Islam, only until they gain enough power to engage in battle.

A former Sharia judge in Pakistan's Supreme Court, 64-year-old Usmani, is...a regular visitor to Britain.
Polite and softly spoken....

He agreed that it was wrong to suggest that the entire non-Muslim world was intent on destroying Islam, but justifies an aggressive military jihad as a means of establishing global Islamic supremacy.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2409833.ece




.




EXAMPLE, MOSLEM DECEIT;


Quote:

A Study in Muslim Doctrine

"...while sincere friendship with non-Muslims is forbidden,

insincere friendship - whenever beneficial to Muslims - is not."


http://www.meforum.org/2512/nidal-hasan-fort-hood-muslim-doctrine





Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:30pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:13pm:
Folau is a hate propagandist and a bogus Christian. 99.99% of Christians are bogus.


Quote:
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

― Mahatma Gandhi 


He's no Christian.

"If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.

"And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well."

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:37pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:00pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:42am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:45pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So Islam has nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky - who'd 've thunk it?

Drink two coffees after waking up before opening mouth .....


I see . . . . .  so knowing her religion makes all the difference in interpreting what she says? Muslims not allowed to be taken at face value?

Spot


Where did I say that?

All I did was say that both Christianity and Islam hold to the idea of an invisible man in the sky - so attacking Folau on that basis was absurd...

Sometimes your thinking is abstruse.... and seems to perpetually seek victimhood for specified groups when you should be looking at truly equal treatment...


She didnt quote from the koran though. She was victimised because ppl KNOW shes muslim. Falau on the other hand is pushing his religion at ppl.

Spot


Anyone who says that Islam is the most feminist religion is going to get mocked, be they Muslim or spineless apologist.


Quote:
Folau is a hate propagandist and a bogus Christian. 99.99% of Christians are bogus.



Quote:
He's no Christian.


So what? Does freedom of speech and freedom of religion depend on whether you approve of his interpretation? I'm sure there are plenty of Muslims who think Yassmin is a hypocrit and needs her head removed.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:00pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:40am:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.


Or like you.

RA won't/can't replace Folau ... they haven't got the depth of talent.


Hate-propagating is a talent?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:05pm
Effendi:


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


I don't Effendi.  So do tell.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by PZ547 on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:07pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:00pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:40am:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.


Or like you.

RA won't/can't replace Folau ... they haven't got the depth of talent.


Hate-propagating is a talent?



Sometimes you make sense, Laugh

other times, not so much

For someone who makes jokes about atrocities, suddenly here you are bitching about something which I at least would have expected you to either ignore because too normal or joke about because that's what you do

so are we to believe now that you're an ardent fan of LGBTIxxxxx

or you fester with hatred over handsome brown guys

or (and I find this difficult to accept) you're too dense, too thick, too stupid to realise/accept that Folau did NOT single out gays


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 5:03pm

PZ547 wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:07pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:00pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:40am:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.


Or like you.

RA won't/can't replace Folau ... they haven't got the depth of talent.


Hate-propagating is a talent?



Sometimes you make sense, Laugh

other times, not so much

For someone who makes jokes about atrocities, suddenly here you are bitching about something which I at least would have expected you to either ignore because too normal or joke about because that's what you do

so are we to believe now that you're an ardent fan of LGBTIxxxxx

or you fester with hatred over handsome brown guys

or (and I find this difficult to accept) you're too dense, too thick, too stupid to realise/accept that Folau did NOT single out gays


Folau never lived up to public expectations in rugby or religion.

Folau is an extremist nutjob and there is no place in public life for extremists or nutjobs.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 5:18pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:05pm:
Effendi:


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


I don't Effendi.  So do tell.


They will go to Hell and they will share a space with only heterosexuals......

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Sir Spot of Borg on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 5:53pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 5:18pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:05pm:
Effendi:


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


I don't Effendi.  So do tell.


They will go to Hell and they will share a space with only heterosexuals......


So the heterosexuals are in hell with only gay's?

😂

Spot

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Captain Caveman on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 6:02pm
Hate to break up a sky daddy convention but they go in the ground/back to earth.....just like everything/everyone else.
That is the only thing we ALL have in common. We cease. Our cells stop dividing altogether,  instead separating and go there own way. We call it death....and we all have it coming. 👍
People are scared of it. Crack up really.



Folau can write what he wants and post it on HIS Facebook account. Im sure if he had of piped up a d said islam is great for women hed get shot down too. Vise versa with pub tuls. She could believe the same thing as IZ. Couldn't care less. But FFS stop being offended by absolutely everything. Offendeds are a fuct up breed. Hurt feelings is not an excuse. Get over it. The so called breech of contract is what they've run with....but highlight the exact breech please. So far I have only seen things that apply to RUGBY. Nothing about personal life AWAY from rugby.
It's as if hurt feelings brigade think people actually give a fkkk. Ha. Self righteous lunatics.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 6:44pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:42am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:45pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So Islam has nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky - who'd 've thunk it?

Drink two coffees after waking up before opening mouth .....


I see . . . . .  so knowing her religion makes all the difference in interpreting what she says? Muslims not allowed to be taken at face value?

Spot


She was taken at face value - a hypocritical TNUC.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 6:45pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:00pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:47am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:42am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:45pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 9:51pm:
The difference between Falou and Yasmin?

She didn't rely on an invisible man in the sky to back up her argument.


So Islam has nothing to do with an invisible man in the sky - who'd 've thunk it?

Drink two coffees after waking up before opening mouth .....


I see . . . . .  so knowing her religion makes all the difference in interpreting what she says? Muslims not allowed to be taken at face value?

Spot


Where did I say that?

All I did was say that both Christianity and Islam hold to the idea of an invisible man in the sky - so attacking Folau on that basis was absurd...

Sometimes your thinking is abstruse.... and seems to perpetually seek victimhood for specified groups when you should be looking at truly equal treatment...


She didnt quote from the koran though. She was victimised because ppl KNOW shes muslim. Falau on the other hand is pushing his religion at ppl.

Spot


You need to see Spec Savers & King Hearing Aids.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 6:47pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 12:13pm:
Folau is a hate propagandist and a bogus Christian. 99.99% of Christians are bogus.


Quote:
“I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.”

― Mahatma Gandhi 


Like you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 6:48pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:00pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:40am:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.


Or like you.

RA won't/can't replace Folau ... they haven't got the depth of talent.


Hate-propagating is a talent?


You should know you're one of them.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 6:51pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 5:03pm:

PZ547 wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:07pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:00pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:40am:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.


Or like you.

RA won't/can't replace Folau ... they haven't got the depth of talent.


Hate-propagating is a talent?



Sometimes you make sense, Laugh

other times, not so much

For someone who makes jokes about atrocities, suddenly here you are bitching about something which I at least would have expected you to either ignore because too normal or joke about because that's what you do

so are we to believe now that you're an ardent fan of LGBTIxxxxx

or you fester with hatred over handsome brown guys

or (and I find this difficult to accept) you're too dense, too thick, too stupid to realise/accept that Folau did NOT single out gays


Folau never lived up to public expectations in rugby or religion.

Folau is an extremist nutjob and there is no place in public life for extremists or nutjobs.


You're a feckin idiot as well ... he is the savior of the Wallabies ... without him they are a sad bunch at the moment.

You wouldn't know your arse from your elbow.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 7:26pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 6:51pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 5:03pm:

PZ547 wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:07pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:00pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:40am:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 11:51pm:
Folau should take his punishment like a man, not the whiney bitch he is now.

RA will now replace Folau with a rugby player, not a hate propagator like Folau.


Or like you.

RA won't/can't replace Folau ... they haven't got the depth of talent.


Hate-propagating is a talent?



Sometimes you make sense, Laugh

other times, not so much

For someone who makes jokes about atrocities, suddenly here you are bitching about something which I at least would have expected you to either ignore because too normal or joke about because that's what you do

so are we to believe now that you're an ardent fan of LGBTIxxxxx

or you fester with hatred over handsome brown guys

or (and I find this difficult to accept) you're too dense, too thick, too stupid to realise/accept that Folau did NOT single out gays


Folau never lived up to public expectations in rugby or religion.

Folau is an extremist nutjob and there is no place in public life for extremists or nutjobs.


You're a feckin idiot as well ... he is the savior of the Wallabies ... without him they are a sad bunch at the moment.

You wouldn't know your arse from your elbow.



Obviously knows nothing about Rugby....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:03pm
Folau the saviour, turned into a martyr by conniving homofascists.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:04pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 2:05pm:
Effendi:


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


I don't Effendi.  So do tell.


Effendi?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:07pm
You must have missed my previous response Aussie. Never mind.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:17pm

freediver wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:07pm:
You must have missed my previous response Aussie. Never mind.


No, I did not miss it at all which is why I am repeating the question just like you do when anyone fails to answer you responsively.

"Don't get excited" or "never mind" does not cut the mustard.

May we have your answer, Effendi.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Where?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:56pm
Crucify the bastard.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by The_Barnacle on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:04pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm:
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy


Yassmin said and did a lot of stupid poo. Even she didn't get fired.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by The_Barnacle on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:15pm

freediver wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:04pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm:
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy


Yassmin said and did a lot of stupid poo. Even she didn't get fired.


She didn't breach her contract.
Yet despite this all the right wingers were calling for her sacking.
The very same people who are now defending faluo

It's clear that people like you, freediver, only believe in freedom of speech when you agree with what is being said

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:29pm

freediver wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:04pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm:
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy


Yassmin said and did a lot of stupid poo. Even she didn't get fired.


She doesn't play rugby for Australia.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gordon on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:01pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm:
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy


Not just the right wing media.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/rugby-australia-israel-folau-firing-free-speech-by-peter-singer-2019-06

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 11:25pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:04pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm:
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy


Yassmin said and did a lot of stupid poo. Even she didn't get fired.


She didn't breach her contract.
Yet despite this all the right wingers were calling for her sacking.
The very same people who are now defending faluo

It's clear that people like you, freediver, only believe in freedom of speech when you agree with what is being said



How was Yassmin's freedom to state her views not upheld?  She got to state them - the public then decided they were stupid utterances and laughed her out of town... better than a tar and feather ride on a rail... nobody sacked her - she quit and went elsewhere to state the same silly views... nobody terminated her contract.... she quit ....

It was her way or the highway .....

If Israel Folau's views had been treated to laughter and derision - I doubt he would have resigned from the Wallabies and gone to England... he would just have shrugged his shoulders and gone on with both holding his views and Rugby... pretty close to live and let live...

It was acceptance of opposing views and moving on without giving an ultimatum .....

Ethnic Minority Pussy Pass much?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:16am

Aussie wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 8:07pm:
You must have missed my previous response Aussie. Never mind.


No, I did not miss it at all which is why I am repeating the question just like you do when anyone fails to answer you responsively.

"Don't get excited" or "never mind" does not cut the mustard.

May we have your answer, Effendi.


Quote:
Everyone already knows where gays go when they die.


Where?


Now now, Aussie, we all know where people who ask FD questions go.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:53am

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:04pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm:
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy


Yassmin said and did a lot of stupid poo. Even she didn't get fired.


She didn't breach her contract.
Yet despite this all the right wingers were calling for her sacking.
The very same people who are now defending faluo

It's clear that people like you, freediver, only believe in freedom of speech when you agree with what is being said


Who called for her sacking?

How do you know she didn't breach her contract?

Yassmin misappropriated taxpayer funds to line her own pocket. That is not some kind of fundamental human right, and a far cry from posting your religious views on your own facebook feed. And at the end of the day, she was not sacked. Folau was.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 4th, 2019 at 1:54pm

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:53am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:04pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 9:53pm:
I am quite astonished that freediver would bring this up as it only makes his argument more foolish.
Lets compare the 2 situations

Yassmin Abdel-Magied
Made a controversial post on social media. deleted the post and apologized for it yet still had the right wing media calling for her sacking.

Israel Falou
Made a controversial post on social media. has done so multiple times and has refused to apologize. Get's sacked for breach of contract. the right wing media claim freedom of speech

spot the hypocrisy


Yassmin said and did a lot of stupid poo. Even she didn't get fired.


She didn't breach her contract.
Yet despite this all the right wingers were calling for her sacking.
The very same people who are now defending faluo

It's clear that people like you, freediver, only believe in freedom of speech when you agree with what is being said


Who called for her sacking?

How do you know she didn't breach her contract?

Yassmin misappropriated taxpayer funds to line her own pocket. That is not some kind of fundamental human right, and a far cry from posting your religious views on your own facebook feed. And at the end of the day, she was not sacked. Folau was.


Eric Abetz for starters. I'm sure there were other liberal politicians, and naturally the usual conga line from Newscorp(se). And that was just for the 'lest we forget' tweet.

Will you now direct your free speech crusade against these right wing attacks?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 4th, 2019 at 2:00pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:15pm:

It's clear that people like you, freediver, only believe in freedom of speech when you agree with what is being said


FD goes into witness protection whenever the usual mob call for any restrictions on freedom to practice Islam. Or if he does say anything it will be to spinelessly apologise for these attacks. He has even stated once that he if muslims can't reign in the terrorists, he'll consider joining the calls for banning muslim's freedom.

When confronted with this double standard, he'll refer to that one time 5 years ago that he defended the burqa.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:43pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 2:00pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 3rd, 2019 at 10:15pm:

It's clear that people like you, freediver, only believe in freedom of speech when you agree with what is being said


FD goes into witness protection whenever the usual mob call for any restrictions on freedom to practice Islam. Or if he does say anything it will be to spinelessly apologise for these attacks. He has even stated once that he if muslims can't reign in the terrorists, he'll consider joining the calls for banning muslim's freedom.

When confronted with this double standard, he'll refer to that one time 5 years ago that he defended the burqa.


You were the one calling for mosques to be closed and Muslims to be punished for holding placards, not me.


Quote:
Eric Abetz for starters.


Ah, one person called for her sacking. The "very same" people now defending Folau?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:05pm

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.


Should the law take morality into account in deciding who can get fired for their religious views?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:06pm

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:05pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.


Should the law take morality into account in deciding who can get fired for their religious views?


When it comes to the issue of homophobia, yes.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:22pm

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:43pm:
Ah, one person called for her sacking. The "very same" people now defending Folau?



and you makes two people.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 4th, 2019 at 10:27pm
At the very least Folau should have been fired from RA for being an unmitigated tosser and dickhead.

Folau has been playing below his capabilities and should be fired for that.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 4th, 2019 at 10:43pm

Laugh till you cry wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 10:27pm:
At the very least Folau should have been fired from RA for being an unmitigated tosser and dickhead.

Folau has been playing below his capabilities and should be fired for that.


Let me guess, that's why you are fired from here so often?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:20am
Cant be Choo Choo.  If that were the case, most here would have been fired including yourself.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:02am

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


I think people should have the right to be offended, and should have the right to determine with whom they wish to associate.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:30am

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


No, it means they have a right to not have hate speech preached to their kids.

Rugby Union has been trying to eradicate homophobia within its ranks for years. They warned Folou the first time he preached against the hommers.

Nothing to do with religion. Folou is free to post publicly about the Lord, and does. The Union is saying he doesn't have the right to spread homophobia while he's on the team.

But I'm curious. Do you support the Muselman preaching against the hommers too?

That's a question.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:20am
They don't just preach against hommers Karamel.

They preach against all non- Muslims .....

seems they hate everyone equally that isn't one of them.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:38am

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:30am:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


No, it means they have a right to not have hate speech preached to their kids.

Rugby Union has been trying to eradicate homophobia within its ranks for years. They warned Folou the first time he preached against the hommers.

Nothing to do with religion. Folou is free to post publicly about the Lord, and does. The Union is saying he doesn't have the right to spread homophobia while he's on the team.

But I'm curious. Do you support the Muselman preaching against the hommers too?

That's a question.


Are you saying Folau's sacking had nothing to do with religion because it was really about ahte speach?


Auggie wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:02am:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


I think people should have the right to be offended, and should have the right to determine with whom they wish to associate.


Does that include sacking people because of their religious views?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:39am

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:05pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.


Should the law take morality into account in deciding who can get fired for their religious views?


When it comes to the issue of homophobia, yes.


Does whether Folau was telling the truth have any impact on this morality of yours?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Laugh till you cry on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:43am
Folau is a bedwetter that has never given 100% for RA.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:17am

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:43pm:
Ah, one person called for her sacking. The "very same" people now defending Folau?


It wasn't one person FD, there was a chorus of calls for her sacking, including a petition that went out:

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/yassmin-abdelmagied-abc-activists-vile-antidiggers-remark-slammed-as-deeply-reprehensible/news-story/a8707ae6efecff24806637eec5fc41a6

And that was just for the single line tweet: "lest we forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria Palestine)"

Were they the same people defending Folau? I don't know, and I never said they were. What I am interested in though is where were the people who are standing up for Folau now on freedom of speech grounds when this attack on someone's freedom was happening. People like you FD. If you think its so terrible for someone's job to be threatened for exercising their freedom of speech, where were you when all these liberal politicians were calling for Yasminn's contract with the ABC to be terminated - just for that single tweet?

Also, I'll take a punt and guess that neither Abetz or Barnaby Joyce (among all the others in the article calling for Yasminn's head) will be saying its ok for RA to terminate Folau's contract. What do you reckon?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:18am

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:39am:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:05pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.


Should the law take morality into account in deciding who can get fired for their religious views?


When it comes to the issue of homophobia, yes.


Does whether Folau was telling the truth have any impact on this morality of yours?


So supporting Islam with all it glaring faults is more moral than making a claim that sinners will go to Hell?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:56am

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:30am:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


No, it means they have a right to not have hate speech preached to their kids.

Rugby Union has been trying to eradicate homophobia within its ranks for years. They warned Folou the first time he preached against the hommers.

Nothing to do with religion. Folou is free to post publicly about the Lord, and does. The Union is saying he doesn't have the right to spread homophobia while he's on the team.

But I'm curious. Do you support the Muselman preaching against the hommers too?

That's a question.


To be fair, FD disagreed with my view that muslims holding up a placard saying "behead those who insult the Prophet" should be charged for incitement, and defended their right to do so. So credit where credit's due. On the other hand, I've always felt that such platitudes prove to be rather convenient when it comes to lumping in all the mainstream teachings of Islam with the ideology of the extremists: since its a bit difficult to call for beheading placards to be banned, but not the Quran itself - if your modus operandi is that they are both identical.

Ultimately, the problem with this, and all the other tired debates including Yasmmin etc, is that it has been completely engulfed in the same old tired partisan culture war. And the reality is, any attempts to separate it from the culture war - whether its FD's "its only about freedom" side, or the opposing "its only about contract law" side - are doomed. Why? Because RA itself wrapped itself in the culture war cloak to begin with - by painting this as a homophobic thing - as opposed to, say, an "atheist-hobic" thing. If you look at his tweet, he lumped in not only gays, but atheists in with such undesirables as drunks, thieves and liars. So why not say he was discriminating against not only gays, but also atheists (who are a far bigger population than gays)? We all know the reason - because attacking homophobia, not 'atheist-phobia' is what fuels the culture war.

As you say K, RA has been campaigning for years to stamp out homophobia. This is right and proper, but it undeniably makes RA right in the vanguard as a partisan player in the culture war. And as such, it is inescapable that they will attract a veritable army of enemies in any case like this - the usual suspects. And it will never matter much what the contract actually says. So its simply futile to try and claim, as many have, that this is only an issue of contract law. Yet at the same time, RA's actions can easily be justified on contract law grounds - as despite what FD has tried to claim, the specificity of the tweet (ie lumping gays in with undesirables like liars and thieves), combined with the specificity of the contract clause (thou shalt treat people with dignity and respect - including specifically regarding sexual orientation) - means that RA are on solid legal grounds.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 5th, 2019 at 1:25pm

Quote:
Were they the same people defending Folau? I don't know, and I never said they were. What I am interested in though is where were the people who are standing up for Folau now on freedom of speech grounds when this attack on someone's freedom was happening. People like you FD. If you think its so terrible for someone's job to be threatened for exercising their freedom of speech, where were you when all these liberal politicians were calling for Yasminn's contract with the ABC to be terminated - just for that single tweet?


I'm not sure if getting her fired was even on the radar here back then. The ANZAC tweet had nothing to do with religion, and Yassmin gave plenty of good, legal reasons for the ABC to fire her. At the end of the day, they did not.


Quote:
Also, I'll take a punt and guess that neither Abetz or Barnaby Joyce (among all the others in the article calling for Yasminn's head) will be saying its ok for RA to terminate Folau's contract. What do you reckon?


You would pass the first test of showing they are the same people, but the situations are still not the same. Yassmin was not fired for her religious views. She was not even fired. She ran away.


Quote:
To be fair, FD disagreed with my view that muslims holding up a placard saying "behead those who insult the Prophet" should be charged for incitement, and defended their right to do so. So credit where credit's due. On the other hand, I've always felt that such platitudes prove to be rather convenient when it comes to lumping in all the mainstream teachings of Islam with the ideology of the extremists: since its a bit difficult to call for beheading placards to be banned, but not the Quran itself - if your modus operandi is that they are both identical.


They are not identical. One is a book. The other is a placard with the condensed message. But you will run into big trouble if you want to ban the placard but not the book.


Quote:
Ultimately, the problem with this, and all the other tired debates including Yasmmin etc, is that it has been completely engulfed in the same old tired partisan culture war. And the reality is, any attempts to separate it from the culture war - whether its FD's "its only about freedom" side, or the opposing "its only about contract law" side


I did not claim it is only about freedom. I am saying that freedom trumps the employer's interest in micromanaging the personal life of their employees. It is only the homofascists that try to pretend there is only one issue here, with various forms of "he was not sacked for his religious view, he was sacked for homophobia, contract terms etc".


Quote:
And it will never matter much what the contract actually says.


That's what the law says. If your contracts violates employment, it does not matter what it says.


Quote:
So its simply futile to try and claim, as many have, that this is only an issue of contract law. Yet at the same time, RA's actions can easily be justified on contract law grounds - as despite what FD has tried to claim, the specificity of the tweet (ie lumping gays in with undesirables like liars and thieves), combined with the specificity of the contract clause (thou shalt treat people with dignity and respect - including specifically regarding sexual orientation) - means that RA are on solid legal grounds.


Again, I have never argued this was relevant legally.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 5th, 2019 at 4:06pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 1:25pm:
I'm not sure if getting her fired was even on the radar here back then.


And I wonder why not? You have proven yourself willing to get on your moral high horse over all sorts of cases regarding alleged individual attacks on freedom. Here we had an employee of the ABC expressing their freedom of speech, followed by a deluge of outrage from members of the government no less - you know the people who control funding and board appointments to the organisation that she worked for - directly calling for her sacking. Clearly a case of someone's employment undergoing undue pressure because of her views. This should have been right up your alley FD.


Quote:
The ANZAC tweet had nothing to do with religion


Irrelevant. The issue is freedom of speech, not religion.


freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 1:25pm:
I am saying that freedom trumps the employer's interest in micromanaging the personal life of their employees.



freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 1:25pm:
Again, I have never argued this was relevant legally.


So what are you actually arguing then FD? For the law to be changed?

Do you actually take issue with RA having the right to dictate the terms of their contract to Folau - when it can include sacking for religious views? Or is your only issue that the 'homofascists' haven't come clean and admitted that he was sacked for his religious views?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 5th, 2019 at 6:43pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:39am:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:05pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.


Should the law take morality into account in deciding who can get fired for their religious views?


When it comes to the issue of homophobia, yes.


Does whether Folau was telling the truth have any impact on this morality of yours?


He wasn't telling the truth, so that's a red herring.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 6:58pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:38am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:30am:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


No, it means they have a right to not have hate speech preached to their kids.

Rugby Union has been trying to eradicate homophobia within its ranks for years. They warned Folou the first time he preached against the hommers.

Nothing to do with religion. Folou is free to post publicly about the Lord, and does. The Union is saying he doesn't have the right to spread homophobia while he's on the team.

But I'm curious. Do you support the Muselman preaching against the hommers too?

That's a question.


Are you saying Folau's sacking had nothing to do with religion because it was really about ahte speach?


Auggie wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:02am:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


I think people should have the right to be offended, and should have the right to determine with whom they wish to associate.


Does that include sacking people because of their religious views?


I asked you a question, FD. Do you want to have a go?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:05pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:56am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:30am:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 9:30pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:14pm:
Do you think people should have a right to freedom from religion?


Yes. That's what it means to be a secular society.


So what does it mean? That people have a right to not hear religious views they find offensive?


No, it means they have a right to not have hate speech preached to their kids.

Rugby Union has been trying to eradicate homophobia within its ranks for years. They warned Folou the first time he preached against the hommers.

Nothing to do with religion. Folou is free to post publicly about the Lord, and does. The Union is saying he doesn't have the right to spread homophobia while he's on the team.

But I'm curious. Do you support the Muselman preaching against the hommers too?

That's a question.


To be fair, FD disagreed with my view that muslims holding up a placard saying "behead those who insult the Prophet" should be charged for incitement, and defended their right to do so. So credit where credit's due. On the other hand, I've always felt that such platitudes prove to be rather convenient when it comes to lumping in all the mainstream teachings of Islam with the ideology of the extremists: since its a bit difficult to call for beheading placards to be banned, but not the Quran itself - if your modus operandi is that they are both identical.

Ultimately, the problem with this, and all the other tired debates including Yasmmin etc, is that it has been completely engulfed in the same old tired partisan culture war. And the reality is, any attempts to separate it from the culture war - whether its FD's "its only about freedom" side, or the opposing "its only about contract law" side - are doomed. Why? Because RA itself wrapped itself in the culture war cloak to begin with - by painting this as a homophobic thing - as opposed to, say, an "atheist-hobic" thing. If you look at his tweet, he lumped in not only gays, but atheists in with such undesirables as drunks, thieves and liars. So why not say he was discriminating against not only gays, but also atheists (who are a far bigger population than gays)? We all know the reason - because attacking homophobia, not 'atheist-phobia' is what fuels the culture war.

As you say K, RA has been campaigning for years to stamp out homophobia. This is right and proper, but it undeniably makes RA right in the vanguard as a partisan player in the culture war. And as such, it is inescapable that they will attract a veritable army of enemies in any case like this - the usual suspects. And it will never matter much what the contract actually says. So its simply futile to try and claim, as many have, that this is only an issue of contract law. Yet at the same time, RA's actions can easily be justified on contract law grounds - as despite what FD has tried to claim, the specificity of the tweet (ie lumping gays in with undesirables like liars and thieves), combined with the specificity of the contract clause (thou shalt treat people with dignity and respect - including specifically regarding sexual orientation) - means that RA are on solid legal grounds.



Good points, G, and you're right. FD has always defended Muslim free speech.

He just wants to ban them altogether.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:11pm

Quote:
I'm not sure if getting her fired was even on the radar here back then. The ANZAC tweet had nothing to do with religion, and Yassmin gave plenty of good, legal reasons for the ABC to fire her. At the end of the day, they did not.


Fire her? For suggesting refugees held in detention should not be forgotten?

I'm curious. Why is Yassmin free to say that on the radio but up for dismissal if she does it on Twitter?

And why should Folou be banned from preaching homophobia on the field, but free to do it on Twitter?

Questions questions. Do you want to give them a go?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:16pm

Auggie wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 6:43pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:39am:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:05pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.


Should the law take morality into account in deciding who can get fired for their religious views?


When it comes to the issue of homophobia, yes.


Does whether Folau was telling the truth have any impact on this morality of yours?


He wasn't telling the truth, so that's a red herring.


Yes, but FD's saying he was.

Do you get it now?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:18pm

Auggie wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 6:43pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:39am:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:05pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:58pm:

Auggie wrote on Jul 4th, 2019 at 7:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 2nd, 2019 at 7:05pm:
It occurs to me that Yassmin is the perfect example of how freedom of speech is supposed to work, while Folau is the perfect example of how to stick your head in your rectum, create a mountain out of a molehill, and turn a man into a martyr for freedom of speech over a banal and familiar opinion.

Yassmin was rightly mocked for saying stupid things, misappropriating public funds to line her own pockets, lying about Islam, and getting hysterical about the criticism she rightly deserved. Despite having plenty of perfectly legal reasons to fire her, the ABC stood by her and refused. But she wilted under the glaring reality of what people think of her. It seemed to take her by surprise. Being an ugly black female Muslim of apparently limited intelligence and perception, she was probably accustomed to being a protected species at the ABC and SBS. She ran away from freedom of speech, while the usual apologists were trying to turn the public mockery of her into an attack on free speech, as though she should be able to do and say stupid things without anyone noticing.

Folau ran towards freedom of speech. Rather than subject him to public criticism for his opinion, the homofascists did the cowardly thing and conspired behind the scenes to make him lose his job - a move that is likely to turn out to be illegal. Then they followed this up with celebrating gofundme pulling his campaign. Both propelled Folau into the spotlight, massively increased public support for him, and allowed him to raise $2million in 2 days. Now he is likely to win the case or get a favourable settlement, all under the public eye. He said something stupid and the homofascists turned him into a hero of free speech for it.

The two cases could not be more different, yet somehow the usual apologists are now trying to use Yassmin to accuse those who support freedom of speech of hypocrisy. Perhaps they should go back and look at what was actually said - their own hysterical claims that criticising Yassmin infringed on her freedom of speech, and their hypocritical backflip on Folau.


The difference between these two situations is the morality of their ideas. Folau expressed a repugnant view, whilst Yassmin expressed a non-repugnant view. Sure, the latter may not be true but if we're going into the realm of objective morals, then it is clear that Yassmin's views are objectively more moral than Folau's.


Do you think that is relevant when it comes to freedom of speech?


It's relevant in some cases and to a certain extent.

In this situation, I personally have no compunction with Israel Folau being fired. He says gays would go to hell when they die. He should be happy that he won't go to hell then.


Is it relevant in this case?


Yes.


Should the law take morality into account in deciding who can get fired for their religious views?


When it comes to the issue of homophobia, yes.


Does whether Folau was telling the truth have any impact on this morality of yours?


He wasn't telling the truth, so that's a red herring.


It's called a hypothetical. Do you understand what they are? If Folau's statement was true, would that change your 'moral' position?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:20pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:18pm:
It's called a hypothetical. Do you understand what they are?



your argument to date :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm
Gandalf:


Quote:
And I wonder why not? You have proven yourself willing to get on your moral high horse over all sorts of cases regarding alleged individual attacks on freedom. Here we had an employee of the ABC expressing their freedom of speech, followed by a deluge of outrage from members of the government no less - you know the people who control funding and board appointments to the organisation that she worked for - directly calling for her sacking. Clearly a case of someone's employment undergoing undue pressure because of her views. This should have been right up your alley FD.


She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Quote:
Irrelevant. The issue is freedom of speech, not religion.


In Folau's case, it is both. In Yassmin's, it had nothing to do with freedom of religion.


Quote:
So what are you actually arguing then FD? For the law to be changed?'


No. The law specifically prevents people from sacking someone based on their religion. That's the grounds on which Folau is taking RA to court.


Quote:
Do you actually take issue with RA having the right to dictate the terms of their contract to Folau - when it can include sacking for religious views?


Yes. That would be an illegal contract term. Or more accurately, an illegal interpretation of a very broad term.


Quote:
Or is your only issue that the 'homofascists' haven't come clean and admitted that he was sacked for his religious views?


That is only an issue with the homofascists who try to misrperesent what is going on. They flip flop between defending it on the grounds of a contractual technicality (and lying in the sense that this means it had nothing to do with his religious views) and actually taking a principled stance on the issue (freedom from religion - which a surprising number of homofascists here have come out of the closet on).

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:27pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
That is only an issue with the homofascists who try to misrperesent what is going on



like pretending he was sacked for his religious beliefs?  :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:32pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Come off it FD, you can't be serious.

Members of the government were calling for her head - over one little tweet. I'm talking about people who actually control funding and board appointements to the ABC, where she was working. We saw in the Guthrie blow-up how seriously the ABC takes such "suggestions" from government members (the board wanted Alberici sacked because they thought Turnbull didn't like her - and then sacked Guthrie (partly) because she didn't).

You can't seriously be suggesting there wasn't a real threat to her job - because she expressed her free speech. How is this anything other than a real and totally unacceptable attack on her free speech?

If Abetz and Joyce etc had simply said "she shouldn't have said that" but either stated specifically, or implied implicitly, that she had the *RIGHT* to say it, even as an ABC employee, then that would be "how free speech is supposed to work". But to come out and specifically say the ABC should sack her for what she said, is not how free speech should work. It is an egregious attack on it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:26pm
FD's about to try an answer.

Right, FD?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:35pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:20pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:18pm:
It's called a hypothetical. Do you understand what they are?



your argument to date :D


You think? To date, FD's answered thus far:

Excuse me, FD, do you think hommers are going to hell?

Read my answer.

I just did. That's what you said.

Read it again.

I did. Are you saying that... ?

...

FD, do you want to answer?

...

We'll try again. Do you think that...?

...

... A simple yes or no will suffice.

...

What sound does a jellyfish make?

...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:36pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:32pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Come off it FD, you can't be serious.

Members of the government were calling for her head - over one little tweet. I'm talking about people who actually control funding and board appointements to the ABC, where she was working. We saw in the Guthrie blow-up how seriously the ABC takes such "suggestions" from government members (the board wanted Alberici sacked because they thought Turnbull didn't like her - and then sacked Guthrie (partly) because she didn't).

You can't seriously be suggesting there wasn't a real threat to her job - because she expressed her free speech. How is this anything other than a real and totally unacceptable attack on her free speech?

If Abetz and Joyce etc had simply said "she shouldn't have said that" but either stated specifically, or implied implicitly, that she had the *RIGHT* to say it, even as an ABC employee, then that would be "how free speech is supposed to work". But to come out and specifically say the ABC should sack her for what she said, is not how free speech should work. It is an egregious attack on it.


They were not calling for her head Gandalf.

Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion if it was merely a small number of politicians and a tiny minority movement calling for him to be sacked, without effect?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:39pm

Quote:
Come off it, FD, you can't be serious.


Oh?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:45pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:32pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Come off it FD, you can't be serious.

Members of the government were calling for her head - over one little tweet. I'm talking about people who actually control funding and board appointements to the ABC, where she was working. We saw in the Guthrie blow-up how seriously the ABC takes such "suggestions" from government members (the board wanted Alberici sacked because they thought Turnbull didn't like her - and then sacked Guthrie (partly) because she didn't).

You can't seriously be suggesting there wasn't a real threat to her job - because she expressed her free speech. How is this anything other than a real and totally unacceptable attack on her free speech?

If Abetz and Joyce etc had simply said "she shouldn't have said that" but either stated specifically, or implied implicitly, that she had the *RIGHT* to say it, even as an ABC employee, then that would be "how free speech is supposed to work". But to come out and specifically say the ABC should sack her for what she said, is not how free speech should work. It is an egregious attack on it.


News Ltd had an entire campaign. Once she got death and rape threats and had eggs and spit thrown at her, they played the free speech no-one-has-the-right-to-not-be-offended card.

Still, fair's fair. FD has never had a problem with Lest we forget, just Islam is the most feminist religion.

Once she said that, well.

She's tinted.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:59pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:36pm:
Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion if it was merely a small number of politicians and a tiny minority movement calling for him to be sacked, without effect?


Government politicians don't have the control and influence over RA, like they do over the ABC FD.

It would be more like Qantas board members demanding that RA (whom they are a major sponsor of) sack Folau. You know, people who RA actually sit up and listen to.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Auggie on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:00pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:18pm:
If Folau's statement was true, would that change your 'moral' position?


We're dealing with the facts, not with what ifs. The statement is not true, so what's your point?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm

Auggie wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:18pm:
If Folau's statement was true, would that change your 'moral' position?


We're dealing with the facts, not with what ifs. The statement is not true, so what's your point?


My point is that you argument does not actually rest on morality, but on getting the government to impose your version of religious truth on other people. If you would allow yourself to be honest, you would admit that your entire morality house of cards falls over on a question of truth.

You cannot prove it is true. That's the whole reason we separate government and religion. In your homofascist zeal you want to put the government back in charge of religion.


polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:59pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:36pm:
Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion if it was merely a small number of politicians and a tiny minority movement calling for him to be sacked, without effect?


Government politicians don't have the control and influence over RA, like they do over the ABC FD.

It would be more like Qantas board members demanding that RA (whom they are a major sponsor of) sack Folau. You know, people who RA actually sit up and listen to.


Would you like to have a go at answering the question?

Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:32pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


Would you like to have a go at answering the question?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:54pm
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - the gay mince, the hystrionic demands, the suicidal imperative, the safe space demands, the attacks on 'normals', the Pink Precincts - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:59pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:32pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Come off it FD, you can't be serious.

Members of the government were calling for her head - over one little tweet. I'm talking about people who actually control funding and board appointements to the ABC, where she was working. We saw in the Guthrie blow-up how seriously the ABC takes such "suggestions" from government members (the board wanted Alberici sacked because they thought Turnbull didn't like her - and then sacked Guthrie (partly) because she didn't).

You can't seriously be suggesting there wasn't a real threat to her job - because she expressed her free speech. How is this anything other than a real and totally unacceptable attack on her free speech?

If Abetz and Joyce etc had simply said "she shouldn't have said that" but either stated specifically, or implied implicitly, that she had the *RIGHT* to say it, even as an ABC employee, then that would be "how free speech is supposed to work". But to come out and specifically say the ABC should sack her for what she said, is not how free speech should work. It is an egregious attack on it.



So 'members of the government' didn't actually sack her?  No more than... say... the Irish QANTAS poof had anything to do with sacking Folau?

Hmm - when someone's right to say something hasn't been abrogated, but they are criticised for saying it.... where is there any need to discuss abrogation of rights?

I can safely say that I disagree with what you said, and think it was silly stuff to say in public - how is that abrogating your right to say it or post it?  Not saying I disagree with everything you post above - just using this as an example...

Now - draw your pay and hit the road - you're sacked!  ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 6th, 2019 at 12:11am

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:45pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:32pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Come off it FD, you can't be serious.

Members of the government were calling for her head - over one little tweet. I'm talking about people who actually control funding and board appointements to the ABC, where she was working. We saw in the Guthrie blow-up how seriously the ABC takes such "suggestions" from government members (the board wanted Alberici sacked because they thought Turnbull didn't like her - and then sacked Guthrie (partly) because she didn't).

You can't seriously be suggesting there wasn't a real threat to her job - because she expressed her free speech. How is this anything other than a real and totally unacceptable attack on her free speech?

If Abetz and Joyce etc had simply said "she shouldn't have said that" but either stated specifically, or implied implicitly, that she had the *RIGHT* to say it, even as an ABC employee, then that would be "how free speech is supposed to work". But to come out and specifically say the ABC should sack her for what she said, is not how free speech should work. It is an egregious attack on it.


News Ltd had an entire campaign. Once she got death and rape threats and had eggs and spit thrown at her, they played the free speech no-one-has-the-right-to-not-be-offended card.

Still, fair's fair. FD has never had a problem with Lest we forget, just Islam is the most feminist religion.

Once she said that, well.

She's tinted.


Those are criminal acts - nothing to do with any sacking ..... and I trust the perpetrators were arrested and charge and punished if found guilty... to the fullest extent of the law...

As I said elsewhere several days ago - citing criminal acts to support a contention of some 'norm' is not valid... and criminal acts are ........ criminal acts pure and simple...

I'd hardly say the majority of Australians were onside with that kind of abuse.... and many such would have punched perps out ...

Sidenote:-  So it's all right to 'egg' Fraser Anning for an innocuous comment on the inevitability of certain acts in response to numerous acts of others - but it's NOT all right to 'egg' a public commentator who utters utter silliness in public with a straight face?

Where do we start and finish with 'egging'?

Before you leap to the fray and over a cliff - I am not discussing rape and death threats and throwing of spit.... those are outside the pale ... but the issue I'm discussing is 'egging' and its moral justification.

Should Fraser Anning be 'egged' without any recourse to justice, natural or otherwise, and receive no sympathy.... and should Yassmin be egged and receive full recourse to justice and natural sympathy?  Are there gradings of 'eggees' that we should consider?  Are they divided by some political divide?  Are some more poof than others and thus only half go to Hell?  Do we, as a nation, hang politicians of one kind but not the other - in which case how far are we removed, in reality, from some Third World Dictatorship that decrees what is right and what is wrong and who should be hung and who should not, along social or political lines?

Questions, questions... so many questions....


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:42am

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.


That's the best you can come up with? I ask again...

"I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?"



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Yadda on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:00am

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account.

I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap.

I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same.

Why are they offended by something they have no belief in?

Why are the poofs so butt hurt?

Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.



It has got everything to do with 'GAY PRIDE' you see.




Setanta,

It is coz queers of all persuasions need 'SAFE SPACES' in which to be queers [of all persuasions].


Its sorta like snowflakes, ....i.e. snowflakes can't be subjected to intense scrutiny.

Why so ?

Coz, to closely scrutinise something, you need a strong light source,      100W at least.

And if you subject a snowflake to a strong light source, they will simply melt away!

Same with queers [of all persuasions].

They too, need 'SAFE SPACES' in which to exist.



Its about 'GAY PRIDE' you see.

Queers of all persuasions, are just SOOOO PROUD of being queers [of all persuasions],
that they fear that they may melt [too!] if they are subjected to any form    social    criticism or scrutiny.

Coz society, is the 'water' in which they swim.

And to be reminded of the existence of a shhhh, a bible, [by Israel Folau [such an unfortunate Christian name too, eh!] ] is simply intolerable!



But.....

'GAY PRIDE LIVES!!!!'

'We're queer! We're here!!!!     Get used to it. ....and don't mention Israel Folau or we'll all cry and assume fetal positions!!!!'



fetal = = of or relating to a fetus.     denoting a posture characteristic of a fetus, with the back curved forwards and the limbs folded in front of the body.


END OF SAFE SPACE !

END OF SAFE SPACE !

END OF SAFE SPACE !



WARNING; QUEERS, SHOULD READ NO FURTHER!!!
.....or, be sure to have a hanky close by, and be prepared to be emotionally compelled to assume the fetal position and to weep uncontrollably!



.




Romans 1:26
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;


1 Corinthians 6:9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10  Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


Galatians 5:19
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20  Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21  Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.




Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:19am

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:42am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.


That's the best you can come up with? I ask again...

"I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?"


Sorry, Setanta, I get you now. And do you know?

As one of their perpetually offended friends, I didn't give a fck either. A football player sacked for being nasty to our boys on social media. No worries.

But the more I think about it, the more I realise how good it is to be nice to each other. The more I think about it, the more I see the perpetually offended haters telling everyone they have the right to not be offended and saved from the dirty hommers and how very dare they fire our star haters.

Alan's a dirty hommer and even he's putting the boot in. The culture wars, it would seem, are being played out by a globalist Irish hommer from the boardroom behind the scenes and his white-nationalist hommer shock-jock opponent on the airwaves.

What a cat fight, eh?

And as ever, you're cheering for Alan. Good for you, dear. I didn't previously care about an issue of contract law, but when I think of Ooga-booga happy-clappies telling decent white people where they'll spend Eternity, well.

We won't have that, dear. It goes against nature.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:37am

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.

Folou was warned he'd be axed from the team if he did it again. Rather than backing down, he made the decision to fire another one off, obviously as a test.

Rugby Australia pulled the only trigger they have - they gave him the boot. If they didn't, they would have been backed into a corner. Folou would have upped the social media campaign and become the haters' happy-clappie hero, a religious figurehead, a player on the religious-right who publicly undermines the national solidarity Rugby Australia wants to portray.

He's now waging a high-stakes campaign for freedom of religious expression, but he wasn't sacked for expressing religious views. He was sacked for hate speech against the hommers. I can't be sure, but I don't think anyone expects him to stop spruiking his religion. That's his right.

And that's why he'll lose his case.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure. What do you expect?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 2:32pm

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:
Everyone else is expected to act like an adult



does that include folau  :D :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 6th, 2019 at 3:00pm
Had to post this:

(Hmm.....seems I have no idea how to re-size...yet.)


Folau_rich__250x188_.jpg (77 KB | 10 )

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Yadda on Jul 6th, 2019 at 3:01pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure.

What do you expect?



TherealKarnal,

Q.
Which hate speech would you be referring to there ?




If you are arguing that it was hate speech, BY, Israel Folau,
then please give us the quote of that hate speech.
[i.e. NOT the scripture, which Israel Folau quoted].


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:07pm

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


I'll drink to that....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:31pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure. What do you expect?


It's not hate speech.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:34pm

Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 3:01pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure.

What do you expect?



TherealKarnal,

Q.
Which hate speech would you be referring to there ?




If you are arguing that it was hate speech, BY, Israel Folau,
then please give us the quote of that hate speech.
[i.e. NOT the scripture, which Israel Folau quoted].


What is God's plan for gays?

HELL... unless they repent their sins and turn to God.

Which gospel is it, Y? Chapter and verse, please.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:37pm

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:31pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure. What do you expect?


It's not hate speech.


That's true. He also said Jesus loves them, no?

What did you say God's plan for the hommers is, FD?

We didn't catch it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:40pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:31pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure. What do you expect?


It's not hate speech.


That's true. He also said Jesus loves them, no?

What did you say God's plan for the hommers is, FD?

We didn't catch it.


Do you think Folau hates gays?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:45pm
Effendi...you have ignored this question first posed by me when I asked where Gays end up, and now Abu also asks.


Quote:
What did you say God's plan for the hommers is, FD?



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:51pm

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:40pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:37pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:31pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure. What do you expect?


It's not hate speech.


That's true. He also said Jesus loves them, no?

What did you say God's plan for the hommers is, FD?

We didn't catch it.


Do you think Folau hates gays?


Only in an existential sense.

Some of those macho Islanders love the hommers.

What's God's plan for them, dear?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Yadda on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:52pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:34pm:

Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 3:01pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure.

What do you expect?



TherealKarnal,

Q.
Which hate speech would you be referring to there ?




If you are arguing that it was hate speech, BY, Israel Folau,
then please give us the quote of that hate speech.
[i.e. NOT the scripture, which Israel Folau quoted].


What is     God's plan      for gays?

HELL... unless they repent their sins and turn to God.

Which gospel is it, Y? Chapter and verse, please.



TherealKarnal,

So when you are referring to    hate speech,      it is the hate speech of God which you are referring to.

And not,       the ideas, the 'plans', and the hate speech,      of Israel Folau ?



TherealKarnal,

If i quote your words, posted in this forum.

Does my quoting of your words/views,     mean that those views [that were expressed and posted by yourself],
can now be 'taken', to be views that have ['magically'] originated from myself ?





'Chapter and verse' ?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1562056827/119#119





Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:58pm

Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:52pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 4:34pm:

Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 3:01pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:38am:

Quote:
I don't think Rugby Australia have atheists and drunks in mind in their anti-homophobia/anti-DV stance, FD, but do go on. It's good to see you express yourself. Most healthy.


Because they are homofascists. Everyone else is expected to act like an adult, but if you include gays on your list suddenly everyone is throwing tantrums and demanding you get fired.


Over hate speech?

Sure.

What do you expect?



TherealKarnal,

Q.
Which hate speech would you be referring to there ?




If you are arguing that it was hate speech, BY, Israel Folau,
then please give us the quote of that hate speech.
[i.e. NOT the scripture, which Israel Folau quoted].


What is     God's plan      for gays?

HELL... unless they repent their sins and turn to God.

Which gospel is it, Y? Chapter and verse, please.



TherealKarnal,

So when you are referring to    hate speech,      it is the hate speech of God which you are referring to.

And not,       the ideas, the 'plans', and the hate speech,      of Israel Folau ?



TherealKarnal,

If i quote your words, posted in this forum.

Does my quoting of your words/views,     mean that those views [that were expressed and posted by yourself],
can now be 'taken', to be views that have ['magically'] originated from myself ?





'Chapter and verse' ?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1562056827/119#119


You haven't quoted God there, Y. You've quoted yourself, dear.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Yadda on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:03pm



@Reply #135,

You are mistaken or 'shortsighted', or both.
....take it to the bank.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:07pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:19am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:42am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.


That's the best you can come up with? I ask again...

"I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?"


Sorry, Setanta, I get you now. And do you know?

As one of their perpetually offended friends, I didn't give a fck either. A football player sacked for being nasty to our boys on social media. No worries.

But the more I think about it, the more I realise how good it is to be nice to each other. The more I think about it, the more I see the perpetually offended haters telling everyone they have the right to not be offended and saved from the dirty hommers and how very dare they fire our star haters.

Alan's a dirty hommer and even he's putting the boot in. The culture wars, it would seem, are being played out by a globalist Irish hommer from the boardroom behind the scenes and his white-nationalist hommer shock-jock opponent on the airwaves.

What a cat fight, eh?

And as ever, you're cheering for Alan. Good for you, dear. I didn't previously care about an issue of contract law, but when I think of Ooga-booga happy-clappies telling decent white people where they'll spend Eternity, well.

We won't have that, dear. It goes against nature.


I've never cheered for Alan, he's grub. Just can't understand why anyone would care what some religious tosser says. As I've said, he has me on his list of "going to hell" and I couldn't care less.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:13pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:19am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:42am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.


That's the best you can come up with? I ask again...

"I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?"


Sorry, Setanta, I get you now. And do you know?

As one of their perpetually offended friends, I didn't give a fck either. A football player sacked for being nasty to our boys on social media. No worries.

But the more I think about it, the more I realise how good it is to be nice to each other. The more I think about it, the more I see the perpetually offended haters telling everyone they have the right to not be offended and saved from the dirty hommers and how very dare they fire our star haters.

Alan's a dirty hommer and even he's putting the boot in. The culture wars, it would seem, are being played out by a globalist Irish hommer from the boardroom behind the scenes and his white-nationalist hommer shock-jock opponent on the airwaves.

What a cat fight, eh?

And as ever, you're cheering for Alan. Good for you, dear. I didn't previously care about an issue of contract law, but when I think of Ooga-booga happy-clappies telling decent white people where they'll spend Eternity, well.

We won't have that, dear. It goes against nature.


I've never cheered for Alan, he's grub. Just can't understand why anyone would care what some religious tosser says. As I've said, he has me on his list of "going to hell" and I couldn't care less.


Oh, it's about the code and representing Australia and being an upstanding role model for our youth - that type of thing.

Lucky we didn't sign up for it, eh?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:13pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:19am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:42am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.


That's the best you can come up with? I ask again...

"I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?"


Sorry, Setanta, I get you now. And do you know?

As one of their perpetually offended friends, I didn't give a fck either. A football player sacked for being nasty to our boys on social media. No worries.

But the more I think about it, the more I realise how good it is to be nice to each other. The more I think about it, the more I see the perpetually offended haters telling everyone they have the right to not be offended and saved from the dirty hommers and how very dare they fire our star haters.

Alan's a dirty hommer and even he's putting the boot in. The culture wars, it would seem, are being played out by a globalist Irish hommer from the boardroom behind the scenes and his white-nationalist hommer shock-jock opponent on the airwaves.

What a cat fight, eh?

And as ever, you're cheering for Alan. Good for you, dear. I didn't previously care about an issue of contract law, but when I think of Ooga-booga happy-clappies telling decent white people where they'll spend Eternity, well.

We won't have that, dear. It goes against nature.


I've never cheered for Alan, he's grub. Just can't understand why anyone would care what some religious tosser says. As I've said, he has me on his list of "going to hell" and I couldn't care less.


Oh, it's about the code and representing Australia and being an upstanding role model for our youth - that type of thing.

Lucky we didn't sign up for it, eh?


What? It's about get a f'in' life and stop complaining about everything. You certainly have a bug up your bum, no problems with Muslims telling me I should be killed for my sins on the list but some fundy Christian repeats something from his book and it's the end of the world. Who gives a shite what religious nutjobs of any stripe say, they're nutjobs... Best ignored.

If you think these goons are really role models for our youth, more fool you and pity upon our younguns..

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:42pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:13pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:07pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:19am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:42am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.


That's the best you can come up with? I ask again...

"I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?"


Sorry, Setanta, I get you now. And do you know?

As one of their perpetually offended friends, I didn't give a fck either. A football player sacked for being nasty to our boys on social media. No worries.

But the more I think about it, the more I realise how good it is to be nice to each other. The more I think about it, the more I see the perpetually offended haters telling everyone they have the right to not be offended and saved from the dirty hommers and how very dare they fire our star haters.

Alan's a dirty hommer and even he's putting the boot in. The culture wars, it would seem, are being played out by a globalist Irish hommer from the boardroom behind the scenes and his white-nationalist hommer shock-jock opponent on the airwaves.

What a cat fight, eh?

And as ever, you're cheering for Alan. Good for you, dear. I didn't previously care about an issue of contract law, but when I think of Ooga-booga happy-clappies telling decent white people where they'll spend Eternity, well.

We won't have that, dear. It goes against nature.


I've never cheered for Alan, he's grub. Just can't understand why anyone would care what some religious tosser says. As I've said, he has me on his list of "going to hell" and I couldn't care less.


Oh, it's about the code and representing Australia and being an upstanding role model for our youth - that type of thing.

Lucky we didn't sign up for it, eh?


What? It's about get a f'in' life and stop complaining about everything. You certainly have a bug up your bum, no problems with Muslims telling me I should be ... Best ignored.

If you think these goons are really role models for our youth, more fool you and pity upon our younguns..


I don't believe you, Setanta. How could you possibly imagine a champion football player is not a huge role model - in Australia of all places?

Folou's the star. He is the team. Apparently he's the most talented player in years.

You might recall the 1980s. Back then, kids regularly went out poofter-bashing. A number of hommers were killed, including a Wollongong news reader. One group of kids killed their teacher. Imagine, only 30 years ago, the penalty for being a hommer - in Australia - was death.

The police routinely turned a blind eye, did nothing, and closed unsolved cases. They were also some of the biggest poofter-bashers themselves.

This is the culture Rugby Australia is attempting to keep down. It's been eradicated for the most part, but as we keep seeing, these things have a strange way of resurfacing.

Remember when you and FD used to speak out against racism?

Memories, no?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:59pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:42pm:
I don't believe you, Setanta. How could you possibly imagine a champion football player is not a huge role model - in Australia of all places?

Folou's the star. He is the team. Apparently he's the most talented player in years.

You might recall the 1980s. Back then, kids regularly went out poofter-bashing. A number of hommers were killed, including a Wollongong news reader. One group of kids killed their teacher. Imagine, only 30 years ago, the penalty for being a hommer - in Australia - was death.

The police routinely turned a blind eye, did nothing, and closed unsolved cases. They were also some of the biggest poofter-bashers themselves.

This is the culture Rugby Australia is attempting to keep down. It's been eradicated for the most part, but as we keep seeing, these things have a strange way of resurfacing.

Remember when you and FD used to speak out against racism?


I don't particularly care what you believe K. They were never my role models, nor my son's role models. Who TF would model themselves on bozos throwing/kicking a ball around. What a great life skill!

Sure shite like that happened in the past, many people were and still are targeted through no fault of their own, see the king hit laws for example. I don't think anyone deserves violence thrust upon them for being a poof, an atheist, a drunk an idolater, etc etc. It's not the 1980s any more not the 17 or 16 80s either. If you want to see hate against poofs, look no further that Islam where it is still in practice to kill them. But no, you can't do that.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:01pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm:
You certainly have a bug up your bum, no problems with Muslims telling me I should be killed for my sins on the list but some fundy Christian repeats something from his book and it's the end of the world.



which one of those muslims who called for your killing represent australia?


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm:
Who gives a shite what religious nutjobs of any stripe say, they're nutjobs... Best ignored.


who gives a poo? How about every kid who follows or plays union?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:03pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:01pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm:
You certainly have a bug up your bum, no problems with Muslims telling me I should be killed for my sins on the list but some fundy Christian repeats something from his book and it's the end of the world.



which one of those muslims who called for your killing represent australia?


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm:
Who gives a shite what religious nutjobs of any stripe say, they're nutjobs... Best ignored.


who gives a poo? How about every kid who follows or plays union?


Are any of these Muslims Australian citizens?  Then they represent Australia...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:14pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:01pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm:
You certainly have a bug up your bum, no problems with Muslims telling me I should be killed for my sins on the list but some fundy Christian repeats something from his book and it's the end of the world.



which one of those muslims who called for your killing represent australia?


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:21pm:
Who gives a shite what religious nutjobs of any stripe say, they're nutjobs... Best ignored.


who gives a poo? How about every kid who follows or plays union?


Grap answered first well enough.

Have you asked them? Are you their designated spokesmanperson? I'm pretty sure the Muslim and fundy Christian kids may well have supported him. Should they be ignored? In my opinion, yes, just as he should have been.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:30pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:14pm:
Grap answered first well enough.

Have you asked them? Are you their designated spokesmanperson? I'm pretty sure the Muslim and fundy Christian kids may well have supported him. Should they be ignored? In my opinion, yes, just as he should have been.



are you seriously arguing that footy players aren't role models for kids?

I don't need to be anyone's designated speaker. There's a reason Nike, Reebok and thousands of other companies spends millions annually on player endorsements. But what do they know right? Choo choo didn't give a fuq about footy players so they must be wrong ;D ;D ;D ;D


get out of your cave.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:33pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:30pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:14pm:
Grap answered first well enough.

Have you asked them? Are you their designated spokesmanperson? I'm pretty sure the Muslim and fundy Christian kids may well have supported him. Should they be ignored? In my opinion, yes, just as he should have been.



are you seriously arguing that footy players aren't role models for kids?

I don't need to be anyone's designated speaker. There's a reason Nike, Reebok and thousands of other companies spends millions annually on player endorsements. But what do they know right? Choo choo didn't give a fuq about footy players so they must be wrong ;D ;D ;D ;D


get out of your cave.


Not for me when I was a kid, not for my kids or any of their friends. I'm sure there are some retards that think highly of these boofheads, probably led on by boofhead parents like you. Who said advertising bullsite doesn't work? Role models...  ;D


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:39pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:33pm:
Not for me when I was a kid, not for my kids or any of their friends.


so because you didn't idolise them, no one else possibly could, right? :D :D :D


You're either arrogant enough to believe that you are the benchmark, or stupid enough to think it.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:43pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:39pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:33pm:
Not for me when I was a kid, not for my kids or any of their friends.


so because you didn't idolise them, no one else possibly could, right? :D :D :D


You're either arrogant enough to believe that you are the benchmark, or stupid enough to think it.


Seriously what TF is there to idolise you idolater? To hell with you. I've not claimed to be a benchmark, that is your strawman. On the other hand every one of my sons has worked from the day they finished studying not sitting back watching "role models" like these boofheads.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:48pm



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:43pm:
Seriously what TF is there to idolise you idolater?



I've never watched a game of rugby in my life. That doesn't mean that I don't accept that fans of the sport do idolise them.


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:43pm:
I've not claimed to be a benchmark, that is your strawman.


YOU were the one to claim that no one could possibly give a crap what he says because footy players were never role models for you and your sons.. :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:49pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:59pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:42pm:
I don't believe you, Setanta. How could you possibly imagine a champion football player is not a huge role model - in Australia of all places?

Folou's the star. He is the team. Apparently he's the most talented player in years.

You might recall the 1980s. Back then, kids regularly went out poofter-bashing. A number of hommers were killed, including a Wollongong news reader. One group of kids killed their teacher. Imagine, only 30 years ago, the penalty for being a hommer - in Australia - was death.

The police routinely turned a blind eye, did nothing, and closed unsolved cases. They were also some of the biggest poofter-bashers themselves.

This is the culture Rugby Australia is attempting to keep down. It's been eradicated for the most part, but as we keep seeing, these things have a strange way of resurfacing.

Remember when you and FD used to speak out against racism?


I don't particularly care what you believe K. They were never my role models, nor my son's role models. Who TF would model themselves on bozos throwing/kicking a ball around. What a great life skill!

Sure shite like that happened in the past, many people were and still are targeted through no fault of their own, see the king hit laws for example. I don't think anyone deserves violence thrust upon them for being a poof, an atheist, a drunk an idolater, etc etc. It's not the 1980s any more not the 17 or 16 80s either. If you want to see hate against poofs, look no further that Islam where it is still in practice to kill them. But no, you can't do that.


Oh, I see. So here you are defending a hommer-bashing Christian and advising us to blame Islam, so unfair, etc. 

I know you don't care, dear, but you do seem to care very deeply about a really mean group called "your lot". FD, Moses, Matty, Homo and a number of other victims here are constantly saying how offensive they are, so I'm curious.

Who are they?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:55pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:43pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:39pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:33pm:
Not for me when I was a kid, not for my kids or any of their friends.


so because you didn't idolise them, no one else possibly could, right? :D :D :D


You're either arrogant enough to believe that you are the benchmark, or stupid enough to think it.


Seriously what TF is there to idolise you idolater? To hell with you. I've not claimed to be a benchmark, that is your strawman. On the other hand every one of my sons has worked from the day they finished studying not sitting back watching "role models" like these boofheads.


So your sons are the benchmark, eh? Good-O.

If you don't care what the haters say, Setanta, why are you writing so many posts about them?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:56pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:48pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:43pm:
Seriously what TF is there to idolise you idolater?



I've never watched a game of rugby in my life. That doesn't mean that I don't accept that fans of the sport do idolise them.


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:43pm:
I've not claimed to be a benchmark, that is your strawman.


YOU were the one to claim that no one could possibly give a crap what he says because footy players were never role models for you and your sons.. :D


So you claim these boofheads are idols for why? Can you think of any reason?

I didn't say no-one gave a crap, I pretty much said it was laughable that anyone would take these boofheads as role models. Perhaps that is what is wrong with our society, expecting boofheads not to be boofheads and to look to real people that can be role models. Personally I didn't have anyone that I would call a role model but I did have an admiration for Douglas Bader. Never give up. I don't believe he was accomplice to any of the things footy players have engaged in over the years. Using boofheads as role models is setting your sights really low.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:58pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:55pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:43pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:39pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:33pm:
Not for me when I was a kid, not for my kids or any of their friends.


so because you didn't idolise them, no one else possibly could, right? :D :D :D


You're either arrogant enough to believe that you are the benchmark, or stupid enough to think it.


Seriously what TF is there to idolise you idolater? To hell with you. I've not claimed to be a benchmark, that is your strawman. On the other hand every one of my sons has worked from the day they finished studying not sitting back watching "role models" like these boofheads.


So your sons are the benchmark, eh? Good-O.

If you don't care what the haters say, Setanta, why are you writing so many posts about them?


They are for me. They have succeeded.

As I have said, I don't know why the whiners didn't just ignore the dickhead. Look where it's got them.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:00pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:49pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:59pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 5:42pm:
I don't believe you, Setanta. How could you possibly imagine a champion football player is not a huge role model - in Australia of all places?

Folou's the star. He is the team. Apparently he's the most talented player in years.

You might recall the 1980s. Back then, kids regularly went out poofter-bashing. A number of hommers were killed, including a Wollongong news reader. One group of kids killed their teacher. Imagine, only 30 years ago, the penalty for being a hommer - in Australia - was death.

The police routinely turned a blind eye, did nothing, and closed unsolved cases. They were also some of the biggest poofter-bashers themselves.

This is the culture Rugby Australia is attempting to keep down. It's been eradicated for the most part, but as we keep seeing, these things have a strange way of resurfacing.

Remember when you and FD used to speak out against racism?


I don't particularly care what you believe K. They were never my role models, nor my son's role models. Who TF would model themselves on bozos throwing/kicking a ball around. What a great life skill!

Sure shite like that happened in the past, many people were and still are targeted through no fault of their own, see the king hit laws for example. I don't think anyone deserves violence thrust upon them for being a poof, an atheist, a drunk an idolater, etc etc. It's not the 1980s any more not the 17 or 16 80s either. If you want to see hate against poofs, look no further that Islam where it is still in practice to kill them. But no, you can't do that.


Oh, I see. So here you are defending a hommer-bashing Christian and advising us to blame Islam, so unfair, etc. 

I know you don't care, dear, but you do seem to care very deeply about a really mean group called "your lot". FD, Moses, Matty, Homo and a number of other victims here are constantly saying how offensive they are, so I'm curious.

Who are they?


I think you have lost the plot you old hommer you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:13pm
How very dare you.
IMG_4376_002.JPG (23 KB | 4 )

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:28pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:56pm:
So you claim these boofheads are idols for why? Can you think of any reason?



It might have something to do with their skill on the footy pitch. Who knows for sure and who really cares, it doesn't change the fact that people follow Follau and take what he says and does very seriously.



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:56pm:
I didn't say no-one gave a crap, I pretty much said it was laughable that anyone would take these boofheads as role models.


and when I suggested that people do treat them as idols, you stupidly questioned if I had asked them. That you and your kids never did so why would anyone else? Now you're pretending you knew all along? How did you know? Had you asked them?




Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:28pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:56pm:
So you claim these boofheads are idols for why? Can you think of any reason?



It might have something to do with their skill on the footy pitch. Who knows for sure and who really cares, it doesn't change the fact that people follow Follau and take what he says and does very seriously.



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 6:56pm:
I didn't say no-one gave a crap, I pretty much said it was laughable that anyone would take these boofheads as role models.


and when I suggested that people do treat them as idols, you stupidly questioned if I had asked them. That you and your kids never did so why would anyone else? Now you're pretending you knew all along? How did you know? Had you asked them?


More fool them. I can't believe you believe the advertising that these meatheads are "role models". Could one aim any lower?


You claimed spokesmanperson for all of them. Not my doing. Just questioning the wisdom of such a claim. You have since claimed you don't idolise them, don't follow the sport, but you still think they are idols. Why are you speaking for a bunch of people that you don't even associate with?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:35pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
I can't believe you believe the advertising that these meatheads are "role models". Could one aim any lower?


so are you're saying they aren't? Or are you being deliberately stupid?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:36pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
You claimed spokesmanperson for all of them



perhaps you should read what's there and not add imaginary words to what I say? I know it's difficult for you, so bent on playing the hero, but you really should try it. You might prevent yourself from looking the total fool.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:38pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:35pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
I can't believe you believe the advertising that these meatheads are "role models". Could one aim any lower?


so are you're saying they aren't? Or are you being deliberately stupid?


As I have said, they were never a role model for me, my kids or their friends. As I have said, if that is the sort of role model you seek you are missing out on people that actually change the world. Some boofhead that can throw or kick a ball around is not a role model kids need.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:50pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:38pm:
As I have said, they were never a role model for me, my kids or their friends. As I have said, if that is the sort of role model you seek you are missing out on people that actually change the world. Some boofhead that can throw or kick a ball around is not a role model kids need.



Personally, I actually  don't disagree with any of that. However that doesn't change the fact that people see them as role models. You say you know that, but then you question it every time I suggest that it is so.

If you are looking for something to build yourself up with, you are, in my humble opinion, failing miserably.  Can I suggest, for your own good, you move on with the conversation?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:53pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:38pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:35pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
I can't believe you believe the advertising that these meatheads are "role models". Could one aim any lower?


so are you're saying they aren't? Or are you being deliberately stupid?


As I have said, they were never a role model for me, my kids or their friends. As I have said, if that is the sort of role model you seek you are missing out on people that actually change the world. Some boofhead that can throw or kick a ball around is not a role model kids need.


Then we agree. So why are you sticking up for them, Setanta?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:54pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:50pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:38pm:
As I have said, they were never a role model for me, my kids or their friends. As I have said, if that is the sort of role model you seek you are missing out on people that actually change the world. Some boofhead that can throw or kick a ball around is not a role model kids need.



Personally, I actually  don't disagree with any of that. However that doesn't change the fact that people see them as role models. You say you know that, but then you question it every time I suggest that it is so.

If you are looking for something to build yourself up with, you are, in my humble opinion, failing miserably.  Can I suggest, for your own good, you move on with the conversation?


Then we agree. What happened to FD?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:55pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:54pm:
Then we agree. What happened to FD?



what sound does a jellyfish make?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:55pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:36pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
You claimed spokesmanperson for all of them



perhaps you should read what's there and not add imaginary words to what I say? I know it's difficult for you, so bent on playing the hero, but you really should try it. You might prevent yourself from looking the total fool.



Did you say "How about every kid who follows or plays union?"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1562056827/142#142
Refer to link for context.
Not a good night for you without your team?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:56pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:38pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:35pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
I can't believe you believe the advertising that these meatheads are "role models". Could one aim any lower?


so are you're saying they aren't? Or are you being deliberately stupid?


As I have said, they were never a role model for me, my kids or their friends. As I have said, if that is the sort of role model you seek you are missing out on people that actually change the world. Some boofhead that can throw or kick a ball around is not a role model kids need.


Then we agree. So why are you sticking up for them, Setanta?


Who am I sticking up for K? If I'm not for you am I against you? Are you GW bush?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by rhino on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:59pm
Ben Cousins has lots of people who think hes a role model, most of them are in prison. Not sure what that proves.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:00pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:55pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:36pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
You claimed spokesmanperson for all of them



perhaps you should read what's there and not add imaginary words to what I say? I know it's difficult for you, so bent on playing the hero, but you really should try it. You might prevent yourself from looking the total fool.



Did you say "How about every kid who follows or plays union?"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1562056827/142#142
Refer to link for context.
Not a good night for you without your team?



see that little thing at the end of my sentence choo choo, surely even a highly edumacated idiot like you knows what that means, right?


How is asking a question turn into 'claims of speaking for every child'?



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:01pm

rhino wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:59pm:
Ben Cousins has lots of people who think hes a role model, most of them are in prison. Not sure what that proves.



it proves that he is a role model. No more, no less.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:05pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:00pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:55pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:36pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
You claimed spokesmanperson for all of them



perhaps you should read what's there and not add imaginary words to what I say? I know it's difficult for you, so bent on playing the hero, but you really should try it. You might prevent yourself from looking the total fool.



Did you say "How about every kid who follows or plays union?"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1562056827/142#142
Refer to link for context.
Not a good night for you without your team?



see that little thing at the end of my sentence choo choo, surely even a highly edumacated idiot like you knows what that means, right?


How is asking a question turn into 'claims of speaking for every child'?


Ah, never did. You brought that into the discussion. My position has always been these meatheads are not role model material. Your question, in adversity to my position, was to claim the above... You may have posed it as a question but your intent was obvious. Look back at the link to get context. Thanks for playing.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:06pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:56pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:38pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:35pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
I can't believe you believe the advertising that these meatheads are "role models". Could one aim any lower?


so are you're saying they aren't? Or are you being deliberately stupid?


As I have said, they were never a role model for me, my kids or their friends. As I have said, if that is the sort of role model you seek you are missing out on people that actually change the world. Some boofhead that can throw or kick a ball around is not a role model kids need.


Then we agree. So why are you sticking up for them, Setanta?


Who am I sticking up for K? If I'm not for you am I against you?


Do you know? I think that's exactly why you're posting here. You're not defending religion or free speech. You're not defending Folou's religious convictions or his boofheadness. You're solely defending his stance on the hommers - which you disagree with - but do so solely to have a stab at "your lot".

A species you sneakily won't identify. Cunning, no?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:07pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

rhino wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:59pm:
Ben Cousins has lots of people who think hes a role model, most of them are in prison. Not sure what that proves.




it proves that he is a role model. No more, no less.


I reckon the point is that all peak sporting bodies take the view that their stars are or have become (for good reason or not) role models so, because they have provided the platform paid for by the public and sponsors, these role models have to toe an appropriate line taking that into account.  After all, that is the goose that lays the golden egg for them all.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:08pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:56pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:53pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:38pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:35pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:31pm:
I can't believe you believe the advertising that these meatheads are "role models". Could one aim any lower?


so are you're saying they aren't? Or are you being deliberately stupid?


As I have said, they were never a role model for me, my kids or their friends. As I have said, if that is the sort of role model you seek you are missing out on people that actually change the world. Some boofhead that can throw or kick a ball around is not a role model kids need.


Then we agree. So why are you sticking up for them, Setanta?


Who am I sticking up for K? If I'm not for you am I against you?


Do you know? I think that's exactly why you're posting here. You're not defending religion or free speech. You're not defending Folou's religious convictions or his boofheadness. You're solely defending his stance on the hommers - which you disagree with - but do so solely to have a stab at "your lot".

A species you sneakily won't identify. Cunning, no?


You are wrong, K. I can't do much about it though. You will believe what you will.

I'm not sure what you mean by "identify" K. If you ask a straight up question, I'll do my best to answer.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:11pm
You most certainly can do something about it, Setanta.

You can answer the question, dear. I will believe what you tell me.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:12pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:05pm:
Ah, never did.


never did what?



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:05pm:
You brought that into the discussion.


you asked who would have them as role models, I suggested two possibilities.



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:05pm:
My position has always been these meatheads are not role model material.


not for you, but they obviously are for others.



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:05pm:
You may have posed it as a question but you intent was obvious


yes, I thought it was obvious that I was suggesting possible fans of folau. Still you disputed it. You still haven't explained how that turned into 'speaking for every child'?


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:05pm:
Look back at the link to get context.


I know what the link says. The problem is that you jumped the gun. You were so quick to go into attack mode that you, once again, trapped yourself.  Perhaps you need to go back and read the thread again?  ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:12pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:06pm:
You're solely defending his stance on the hommers - which you disagree with - but do so solely to have a stab at "your lot".



Bingo

;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:18pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:12pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:06pm:
You're solely defending his stance on the hommers - which you disagree with - but do so solely to have a stab at "your lot".



Bingo

;D ;D


Unfortunately for you I'm not. I don't feel the need to support his religious beliefs that I do not share, I also don't support all the butt hurt from him expressing his fucked up beliefs. You people want, no scream for a black and white solution. I can handle his religious beliefs, we hear them all the time from different religions, one of which you lot stand up for. It's a really simple thing to do, religious nut says something, ignore it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:19pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:18pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:12pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:06pm:
You're solely defending his stance on the hommers - which you disagree with - but do so solely to have a stab at "your lot".



Bingo

;D ;D


Unfortunately for you I'm not. I don't feel the need to support his religious beliefs that I do not share, I also don't support all the butt hurt from him expressing his fucked up beliefs. You people want, no scream for a black and white solution. I can handle his religious beliefs, we hear them all the time from different religions, one of which you lot stand up for. It's a really simple thing to do, religious nut says something, ignore it.


your first 5 words says one thing, the rest contradicts it.  :D :D :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:19pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:18pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:12pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:06pm:
You're solely defending his stance on the hommers - which you disagree with - but do so solely to have a stab at "your lot".



Bingo

;D ;D


Unfortunately for you I'm not. I don't feel the need to support his religious beliefs that I do not share, I also don't support all the butt hurt from him expressing his fucked up beliefs. You people want, no scream for a black and white solution. I can handle his religious beliefs, we hear them all the time from different religions, one of which you lot stand up for. It's a really simple thing to do, religious nut says something, ignore it.


your first 5 words says one thing, the rest contradicts it.  :D :D :D


Spell it out then Mimo. The "your lot" mentioned in the post I responded to, what does it mean and what does it mean to my feelings on poofs or meatheads? Are you a poof or a meathead?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:27pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:18pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:12pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:06pm:
You're solely defending his stance on the hommers - which you disagree with - but do so solely to have a stab at "your lot".



Bingo

;D ;D


Unfortunately for you I'm not. I don't feel the need to support his religious beliefs that I do not share, I also don't support all the butt hurt from him expressing his fucked up beliefs. You people want, no scream for a black and white solution. I can handle his religious beliefs, we hear them all the time from different religions, one of which you lot stand up for. It's a really simple thing to do, religious nut says something, ignore it.


Don't want to answer the question, do you, dear?

Who are "you people"? You say this in every post. They do bother you so.

If you don't mind me saying, they seem to offend you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:30pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo



nah, I'll leave you to work it out.  ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:33pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:30pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo



nah, I'll leave you to work it out.  ;D ;D


You'd even think I'd bother about what is in your head? Continue laughing until you cry.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:34pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:33pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:30pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo



nah, I'll leave you to work it out.  ;D ;D


You'd even think I'd bother about what is in your head? Continue laughing until you cry.


no thinking required. I know you'd bother. You've proven it.


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo.




;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:36pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:34pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:33pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:30pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo



nah, I'll leave you to work it out.  ;D ;D


You'd even think I'd bother about what is in your head? Continue laughing until you cry.


no thinking required. I know you'd bother. You've proven it.


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo.




;D ;D ;D


And you can't...  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:39pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:36pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:34pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:33pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:30pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo



nah, I'll leave you to work it out.  ;D ;D


You'd even think I'd bother about what is in your head? Continue laughing until you cry.


no thinking required. I know you'd bother. You've proven it.


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:22pm:
Spell it out then Mimo.




;D ;D ;D


And you can't...  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D



Why would I bother? I tried helping you earlier and you were so busy trying to get one up on me that you refused to listen. Don't expect any further help from me for tonight at least.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:40pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:34pm:

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:41pm
I never realised how much my laughing faces bothered you. Nice to know. Thanks for that


;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:42pm
So many laughing faces laughing at you Mimo.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:46pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFacWGBJ_cs

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:46pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:42pm:
So many laughing faces laughing at you Mimo.




not really choo choo. It's just one, you. Trying to cover for your incompetence.

That's one difference between you and I. I laugh because I find you or your attempts at 'arguments' funny. You laugh to try and hide your fear and incompetence.

I take your laughing faces as sign that I'm on the right track


;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:48pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:41pm:
I never realised how much my laughing faces bothered you. Nice to know. Thanks for that


;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


They might be something "you people" like.

Setanta seems positively traumatised by them.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:51pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:48pm:
They might be something "you people" like.

Setanta seems positively traumatised by them.


every one is against him the poor fellow.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:46pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:42pm:
So many laughing faces laughing at you Mimo.




not really choo choo. It's just one, you. Trying to cover for your incompetence.

That's one difference between you and I. I laugh because I find you or your attempts at 'arguments' funny. You laugh to try and hide your fear and incompetence.

I take your laughing faces as sign that I'm on the right track


;D ;D ;D


In that case I have to wonder who those other faces you posted laughing belong to. Laughing for others? You really are a pathetic creature. I know you'll have others telling you that it's not true but it is. We were having a simple discussion on what people should ignore. It seems you are one of those things.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:54pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:51pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:48pm:
They might be something "you people" like.

Setanta seems positively traumatised by them.


every one is against him the poor fellow.

I think we know that is untrue. Unless "everyone" is a member of of Monks drunks.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:00pm
John, support K in this request. It seems Aussie ignores it even though K implores him.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1561971945/133#133

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:02pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
In that case I have to wonder who those other faces you posted laughing belong to. Laughing for others?


why would you say that? Unlike you, I've never claimed to speak for anyone else.


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
You really are a pathetic creature.


Ohh, I hit a nerve did I?  ;D ;D ;D ;D
so pathetic that you've dedicated your evening to trying to one up me. Who is more pathetic? :D :D :D



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
I know you'll have others telling you that it's not true but


as opposed to what you say?  ;D ;D ;D


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
We were having a simple discussion on what people should ignore.


no, we were discussing the fact that they were role models for some. Irrespective of if you agree with them or not


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
It seems you are one of those things.


and yet you seem to follow me around like a good little bitch should.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:03pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:54pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:51pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:48pm:
They might be something "you people" like.

Setanta seems positively traumatised by them.


every one is against him the poor fellow.

I think we know that is untrue. Unless "everyone" is a member of of Monks drunks.



you tell me. Afterall, you're the one who can't seem to make a post without crying about 'you people'

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:07pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:00pm:
John, support K in this request. It seems Aussie ignores it even though K implores him.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1561971945/133#133



Why? So you can try to attribute what others do or say to me again? Or hold me responsible for what they say?

No thanks. You picked your song, now bend over and enjoy the dance.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:08pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:02pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
In that case I have to wonder who those other faces you posted laughing belong to. Laughing for others?


why would you say that? Unlike you, I've never claimed to speak for anyone else.


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
You really are a pathetic creature.


Ohh, I hit a nerve did I?  ;D ;D ;D ;D
so pathetic that you've dedicated your evening to trying to one up me. Who is more pathetic? :D :D :D



Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
I know you'll have others telling you that it's not true but


as opposed to what you say?  ;D ;D ;D


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
We were having a simple discussion on what people should ignore.


no, we were discussing the fact that they were role models for some. Irrespective of if you agree with them or not


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:52pm:
It seems you are one of those things.


and yet you seem to follow me around like a good little bitch should.


I have no idea why you think I follow you. I have been in this thread for hours. I guess it's the want of feeling important and someone taking you seriously. Sorry to disappoint. Perhaps you have feelings of persecution? A victim? Someone who has been subdued.

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

So many faces laughing at you, not with you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:10pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:07pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:00pm:
John, support K in this request. It seems Aussie ignores it even though K implores him.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1561971945/133#133



Why? So you can try to attribute what others do or say to me again? Or hold me responsible for what they say?

No thanks. You picked your song, now bend over and enjoy the dance.


No, so you can see what Aussie is. You will notice he refuses to show the shit on my fingers as K puts it. Do you wonder why?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:11pm

Is that you ignoring me choo choo?

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:14pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:11pm:
Is that you ignoring me choo choo?

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Are we in a laughy face war? Looking well armed boof.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:15pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:14pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:11pm:
Is that you ignoring me choo choo?

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Are we in a laughy face war? Looking well armed boof.


We're at war?


boy, you don't handle getting it wrong very well do you?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:19pm
That was the question, you noticed the ? at the end of the sentence, yeah?

Now ask Aussie why he won't let me put poop on my fingers for K to get his miams off on.. Surely you want him to paste me with poop.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:23pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:19pm:
That was the question, you noticed the ? at the end of the sentence, yeah?



yes, and I repeated your question. You noticed the ? at the end of the sentence, yeah?


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:19pm:
Now ask Aussie why he won't let me put poop on my fingers for K to get his miams off on.. Surely you want him to paste me with poop.


why? you can't fight your own battles? Need help?

;D ;D ;D


I suggest you go get some sleep and try again tomorrow. It doesn't seem to be going well for you tonight.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:26pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:42pm:
So many laughing faces laughing at you Mimo.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Now that we've all had a good old chuckle, dear, do you want to give the question a stab?

Who's "you people"?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:36pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:23pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:19pm:
That was the question, you noticed the ? at the end of the sentence, yeah?



yes, and I repeated your question. You noticed the ? at the end of the sentence, yeah?


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:19pm:
Now ask Aussie why he won't let me put poop on my fingers for K to get his miams off on.. Surely you want him to paste me with poop.


why? you can't fight your own battles? Need help?

;D ;D ;D


I suggest you go get some sleep and try again tomorrow. It doesn't seem to be going well for you tonight.


How do you come to that conclusion? I'm giving Aussie a chance to know the answer he asked in that thread and the chance to acknowledge how far you will suck up his arse. I'm sure he will continue to take my advice and abstain from giving permission.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:45pm
Something tells me Sentanta's learnt from the master.

What sound does a jellyfish make?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:45pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:45pm:
Something tells me Sentanta's learnt from the master.

What sound does a jellyfish make?


What sound does a Lawyer make? Apparently you don't like the sound one may make but the other's sound is OK. Push him K. See what he has to say. There is poop to fling and miam to be had. As I have said a few times, he won't go there. You yourself asked him to go there so I had poop on my fingers. Why do you think he hesitates?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:01pm
Let's go for a straight answer this time. We'll do a multiple choice.

Who are Setanta's "you people"?

A. The AIDS-spreaders and their handbags

B. The leftards

C. The Muslims and their filthy apologists

D. The race-traitors

E. The tinted hoards and dirty racist Boongs

F. So mean and offensive, especially to Setanta

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:02pm
I blame Islam, but that's just moi.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:13pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 10:02pm:
I blame Islam, but that's just moi.


Wise decision? Perhaps.

If I have ever used "you people" it would be monk's drunks and for all I know they could meet "all of the above". How would I know? Do you want to confess? It's OK. I use a proxy, it's like an internet condom. ;D


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:43pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:18pm:
I don't feel the need to support his religious beliefs that I do not share, I also don't support all the butt hurt from him expressing his fucked up beliefs. You people want, no scream for a black and white solution.


Are they screamers?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 7th, 2019 at 10:00am

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:36pm:
I'm giving Aussie a chance to know the answer he asked in that thread and the chance to acknowledge how far you will suck up his arse. I'm sure he will continue to take my advice and abstain from giving permission.


I don't give a rats arse about your gripe with Aussie in another thread. Why are you trying to deflect to Aussie in a thread that has nothing to do with him? The fact that you are should have given you the answer to this question


Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:36pm:
How do you come to that conclusion?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:03pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


No-one stopped Folau from doing that.  It is self evident he said what he wanted to say.  Now....come the contractual consequences.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:21pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:03pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


No-one stopped Folau from doing that.  It is self evident he said what he wanted to say.  Now....come the contractual consequences.


And his contract ... or contractual obligations are contrary to his constitutional rights & the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm
Nope.  I can contract out of a right the UNHCR might seek to give me.

The bloke signed up for $M4 on conditions.  Breach them......bye bye.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:24pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them


He didn't over ride his rights Giovanni 

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:25pm
What's the matter, Setanta?

Cat got your tongue?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:49pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:25pm:
What's the matter, Setanta?

Cat got your tongue?


And a sweet little pussy it is.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:50pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:18pm:
I don't feel the need to support his religious beliefs that I do not share, I also don't support all the butt hurt from him expressing his fucked up beliefs. You people want, no scream for a black and white solution.


Are they screamers?


If a scream can't be heard over the internet, did it ever happen?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 8th, 2019 at 10:03pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:49pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:25pm:
What's the matter, Setanta?

Cat got your tongue?


And a sweet little pussy it is.


You've changed your tune. You were just saying how awful you people are.

What's it to be?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 8th, 2019 at 11:16pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 10:03pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:49pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:25pm:
What's the matter, Setanta?

Cat got your tongue?


And a sweet little pussy it is.


You've changed your tune. You were just saying how awful you people are.

What's it to be?


What tune is that? You asked a Q, I answered it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 9th, 2019 at 7:43am

Setanta wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 11:16pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 10:03pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:49pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:25pm:
What's the matter, Setanta?

Cat got your tongue?


And a sweet little pussy it is.


You've changed your tune. You were just saying how awful you people are.

What's it to be?


What tune is that? You asked a Q, I answered it.


Oh?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 9th, 2019 at 5:13pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them


He didn't over ride his rights Giovanni 



sure he did. He signed the contract. No one held a gun to his head. He could have insisted on keeping his rights then, but for some reason he was perfectly happy to sign them away :D :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 9th, 2019 at 7:43pm
I see the schiessen is stirring over SloMo's proposed religious freedom bill... Pauline doesn't like it because it could permit Mussos to go on the rampage, and the Mussos want to make sure that universal rights and freedoms actually include them... well.... DUH!

Well - where does the freedom to express your religion - within the bounds of laws set in place already - allow head lopping etc or prevent a Musso from preaching on the virtues of Islam (without violence or violent intent etc)?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 9th, 2019 at 7:48pm

Quote:
SloMo's proposed religious freedom bill


Link to this Bill?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by rhino on Jul 9th, 2019 at 9:22pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 5:13pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them


He didn't over ride his rights Giovanni 



sure he did. He signed the contract. No one held a gun to his head. He could have insisted on keeping his rights then, but for some reason he was perfectly happy to sign them away :D :D
So, domestically Australian law trumps UN treaties or agreements, is this what you are saying?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 9th, 2019 at 9:55pm
Folou has such a right, Rhino, as do you. Feel free to condemn the hommers to hell here, dear. The government will protect your right to do so.

So will FD, of course. But if you complain about white supremacists or any of his pet groups, FD may choose to ban you. It is, as he says, his right under his site's terms and conditions. It's his choice.

After all, what sound does a jellyfish make?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 9th, 2019 at 10:19pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 7:48pm:

Quote:
SloMo's proposed religious freedom bill


Link to this Bill?



Turn the TV set on.....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:38am

Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?


Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?


If you were a "poof" and/or someone who actually faces real discrimination in society you wouldn't need to ask this.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:07pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.


;D You keep believing that's all it was..  ::)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:33pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:07pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.


;D You keep believing that's all it was..  ::)


Lest. We. Forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine ...)

Horrifying huh?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 10th, 2019 at 2:39pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.



Yassmin wasn't sacked ..................she left of her own accord.......... her sails filed with gales of laughter which took the wind out of her sails....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 10th, 2019 at 4:54pm

rhino wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 9:22pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 5:13pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them


He didn't over ride his rights Giovanni 



sure he did. He signed the contract. No one held a gun to his head. He could have insisted on keeping his rights then, but for some reason he was perfectly happy to sign them away :D :D
So, domestically Australian law trumps UN treaties or agreements, is this what you are saying?


Of course domestic laws trump international agreements.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 10th, 2019 at 6:02pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:33pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:07pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.


;D You keep believing that's all it was..  ::)


Lest. We. Forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine ...)

Horrifying huh?


Timing was everything ... no?

Horrifying no .. deliberately disrespectful yes.

One of her taxpayer funded mates wants to burn the country down .... offensive?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 10th, 2019 at 6:03pm
##

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Jul 10th, 2019 at 9:41pm
Will you persist in these lewd acts which no other nation has committed before you? You lust after men instead of women. Truly, you are a degenerate people. (Quran 7:81-82)

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” Abu Dawud 4462 (This is a sahih hadith)


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Jul 10th, 2019 at 9:43pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:33pm:
Lest. We. Forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine ...)

Horrifying huh?



Will you persist in these lewd acts which no other nation has committed before you? You lust after men instead of women. Truly, you are a degenerate people. (Quran 7:81-82)

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” Abu Dawud 4462 (This is a sahih hadith)



Horrifying huh?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 11th, 2019 at 12:44am

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 4:54pm:

rhino wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 9:22pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 5:13pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them


He didn't over ride his rights Giovanni 



sure he did. He signed the contract. No one held a gun to his head. He could have insisted on keeping his rights then, but for some reason he was perfectly happy to sign them away :D :D
So, domestically Australian law trumps UN treaties or agreements, is this what you are saying?


Of course domestic laws trump international agreements.


Yes ... they DO, Luig......

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 11th, 2019 at 8:25am

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 4:54pm:

rhino wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 9:22pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 5:13pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them


He didn't over ride his rights Giovanni 



sure he did. He signed the contract. No one held a gun to his head. He could have insisted on keeping his rights then, but for some reason he was perfectly happy to sign them away :D :D
So, domestically Australian law trumps UN treaties or agreements, is this what you are saying?


Of course domestic laws trump international agreements.


Actually, treaty law is Australian law. Treaties are legislated.

Rights, on the other hand, are more broad. The UN Charter on the Rights of the Child, for example,is taken seriously, but it's not law, it forms policy - especially in schools and child welfare services. Their acceditors use the principles of UN charter to authorise them.

Anti-discrimination and human right charters are another mon-legally binding agreement. We have a commission for these rights - we have no bill of rights like other countries. The commission is able to litigate under civil law. Agencies that discriminate for various reasons seek exhemption for a time-limited period.

The homeless shelter I work at sought exhemption for trannies. It didn't want to place any man who called himself a woman on the female floor. The refuge has shared bathrooms. So when transgender people came in, we asked whether they'd had surgery. If they had, they were classed as women. If not, they went to a male floor. They had to seek exhemption from the equal rights commission to do this - every 2 years, I think.

Now they have a tranny room with its own bathroom, so it's all good, but this is an example of how Australia implements international human rights.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 11th, 2019 at 11:46am

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 2:39pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.



Yassmin wasn't sacked ..................she left of her own accord.......... her sails filed with gales of laughter which took the wind out of her sails....


Never said she was. The ABC commendably stood by her, as they stood by Emma Alberici when the government was piling the pressure on. And we didn't call that attack on the ABC's supposed independence as a good thing for free speech - and nor should it be called so in the Yassmin case.

Like I said before, had Barnaby or Abetz simply said "I don't think what she said was appropriate etc, but she has a right to say it" - then that would have made all the difference. But they didn't - they specifically called for her to be sacked for it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 11th, 2019 at 2:51pm

Frank wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 9:43pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:33pm:
Lest. We. Forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine ...)

Horrifying huh?



Will you persist in these lewd acts which no other nation has committed before you? You lust after men instead of women. Truly, you are a degenerate people. (Quran 7:81-82)

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” Abu Dawud 4462 (This is a sahih hadith)



Horrifying huh?


Did she quote a Hadith?

Oh my. What an awful tinted rotter.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 11th, 2019 at 5:21pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 8:25am:

John Smith wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 4:54pm:

rhino wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 9:22pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 9th, 2019 at 5:13pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 9:24pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 6:40pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 3:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 12:18pm:
Seeings how Peccarhead is always championing refugees in detention human rights according to the UN etc etc.

How about he take heed of The UNs Declaration of Human Rights regarding Israel Folau?

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private,to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

And Article 19:

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas "through any media" and regardless of frontiers.


Not sure what your point is, as those freedoms haven't been taken away from him.


They've been overridden.


it was Folaus decision to override them


He didn't over ride his rights Giovanni 



sure he did. He signed the contract. No one held a gun to his head. He could have insisted on keeping his rights then, but for some reason he was perfectly happy to sign them away :D :D
So, domestically Australian law trumps UN treaties or agreements, is this what you are saying?


Of course domestic laws trump international agreements.


Actually, treaty law is Australian law. Treaties are legislated.

Rights, on the other hand, are more broad. The UN Charter on the Rights of the Child, for example,is taken seriously, but it's not law, it forms policy - especially in schools and child welfare services. Their acceditors use the principles of UN charter to authorise them.

Anti-discrimination and human right charters are another mon-legally binding agreement. We have a commission for these rights - we have no bill of rights like other countries. The commission is able to litigate under civil law. Agencies that discriminate for various reasons seek exhemption for a time-limited period.

The homeless shelter I work at sought exhemption for trannies. It didn't want to place any man who called himself a woman on the female floor. The refuge has shared bathrooms. So when transgender people came in, we asked whether they'd had surgery. If they had, they were classed as women. If not, they went to a male floor. They had to seek exhemption from the equal rights commission to do this - every 2 years, I think.

Now they have a tranny room with its own bathroom, so it's all good, but this is an example of how Australia implements international human rights.



Thanks. ;)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:26am

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 11:46am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 2:39pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.



Yassmin wasn't sacked ..................she left of her own accord.......... her sails filed with gales of laughter which took the wind out of her sails....


Never said she was. The ABC commendably stood by her, as they stood by Emma Alberici when the government was piling the pressure on. And we didn't call that attack on the ABC's supposed independence as a good thing for free speech - and nor should it be called so in the Yassmin case.

Like I said before, had Barnaby or Abetz simply said "I don't think what she said was appropriate etc, but she has a right to say it" - then that would have made all the difference. But they didn't - they specifically called for her to be sacked for it.



Yeee-usssh - but the fact remains that she wasn't sacked... big difference...

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/julie-bishop-resists-eric-abetzs-call-to-sack-yassmin-abdelmagied-20170508-gw0cbb.html

"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.

In a letter to Liberal senator Eric Abetz and obtained by Fairfax Media, Ms Bishop says that she had decided against "terminating" Ms Abdel-Magied from her position on the board of the Council for Australian-Arab Relations which is run by the ­Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade."


There's more - but being a silly bint and out of touch doesn't mean she is vicious and nasty and should be offered rape and death or sacking... she did apologise...

Abetz did call for her sacking.... I thought they should create her own comedy segment for her to air her views...  8-)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:30am
Anyway - my view is that the views of both Yassmin and Israel are worthy of a shrug, a shake of the head, and a moving on... not the kind of furore that has developed over such innocuous comments .... we can all pause to remember Manus etc ..... no big deal..... and gays going to hell?  Who cares if there is no hell anyway?

More laugh-worthy was 'Islam is the most feminist religion' .... now that deserves a comedy award for excellence...  8-)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:35am

Karnal wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 2:51pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 9:43pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:33pm:
Lest. We. Forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine ...)

Horrifying huh?



Will you persist in these lewd acts which no other nation has committed before you? You lust after men instead of women. Truly, you are a degenerate people. (Quran 7:81-82)

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” Abu Dawud 4462 (This is a sahih hadith)



Horrifying huh?


Did she quote a Hadith?

Oh my. What an awful tinted rotter.


Tinted?  It would get the same response coming from Snow White and The Seven Mental Midgets ......

Leigh Sales - "Islam is now officially the most Feminist religion, according to studies undertaken by a Learned Professor in Moronistan.  The Australian Government has come out in support of the views of Professor Farken Blindasabat, head of the Moronistan Bureau of Gender Equality, who says that in-depth studies have shown the stark reality of Islam as regards women's rights... with those rights far exceeding those of men in Islam, and especially Moronistan"...

What's dusky got to do with it?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 12th, 2019 at 8:35am

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:26am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 11:46am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 2:39pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.



Yassmin wasn't sacked ..................she left of her own accord.......... her sails filed with gales of laughter which took the wind out of her sails....


Never said she was. The ABC commendably stood by her, as they stood by Emma Alberici when the government was piling the pressure on. And we didn't call that attack on the ABC's supposed independence as a good thing for free speech - and nor should it be called so in the Yassmin case.

Like I said before, had Barnaby or Abetz simply said "I don't think what she said was appropriate etc, but she has a right to say it" - then that would have made all the difference. But they didn't - they specifically called for her to be sacked for it.



Yeee-usssh - but the fact remains that she wasn't sacked... big difference...

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/julie-bishop-resists-eric-abetzs-call-to-sack-yassmin-abdelmagied-20170508-gw0cbb.html

"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.

In a letter to Liberal senator Eric Abetz and obtained by Fairfax Media, Ms Bishop says that she had decided against "terminating" Ms Abdel-Magied from her position on the board of the Council for Australian-Arab Relations which is run by the ­Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade."


There's more - but being a silly bint and out of touch doesn't mean she is vicious and nasty and should be offered rape and death or sacking... she did apologise...

Abetz did call for her sacking.... I thought they should create her own comedy segment for her to air her views...  8-)


Pseudo Arab.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 12th, 2019 at 12:31pm
from Grappler's article:


Quote:
"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.


So this is what passes as 'free speech' eh?

Employees of the supposedly independent ABC are "free" to say what they want as long as they admit they were wrong, offer a grovelling apology and undergo re-education - whenever someone from the government gets hurt feeling by what they said?

FMD, it sounds more like something out of North Korea.

How do you think it would fly with culture warriors like FD if Falua was able to keep his job with RA - provided he too agreed to undergo such humiliating grovelling and re-education?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Mr Hammer on Jul 12th, 2019 at 12:48pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:35am:

Karnal wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 2:51pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 9:43pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 12:33pm:
Lest. We. Forget (Manus, Nauru, Syria, Palestine ...)

Horrifying huh?



Will you persist in these lewd acts which no other nation has committed before you? You lust after men instead of women. Truly, you are a degenerate people. (Quran 7:81-82)

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” Abu Dawud 4462 (This is a sahih hadith)



Horrifying huh?


Did she quote a Hadith?

Oh my. What an awful tinted rotter.


Tinted?  It would get the same response coming from Snow White and The Seven Mental Midgets ......

Leigh Sales - "Islam is now officially the most Feminist religion, according to studies undertaken by a Learned Professor in Moronistan.  The Australian Government has come out in support of the views of Professor Farken Blindasabat, head of the Moronistan Bureau of Gender Equality, who says that in-depth studies have shown the stark reality of Islam as regards women's rights... with those rights far exceeding those of men in Islam, and especially Moronistan"...

What's dusky got to do with it?

That's f-en unbelievable!!

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 12th, 2019 at 4:08pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 12:31pm:
How do you think it would fly with culture warriors like FD if Falua was able to keep his job with RA - provided he too agreed to undergo such humiliating grovelling and re-education?




I'm sure he'll be along shortly to tell us.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 12th, 2019 at 4:47pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 12:31pm:
from Grappler's article:


Quote:
"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.


So this is what passes as 'free speech' eh?

Employees of the supposedly independent ABC are "free" to say what they want as long as they admit they were wrong, offer a grovelling apology and undergo re-education - whenever someone from the government gets hurt feeling by what they said?

FMD, it sounds more like something out of North Korea.

How do you think it would fly with culture warriors like FD if Falua was able to keep his job with RA - provided he too agreed to undergo such humiliating grovelling and re-education?


I don't think FD would appreciate that too much, G. Folou would have to get back in FD's good books with a gripe about the Boongs.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 12th, 2019 at 4:49pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 8:35am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:26am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 11:46am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 2:39pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.



Yassmin wasn't sacked ..................she left of her own accord.......... her sails filed with gales of laughter which took the wind out of her sails....


Never said she was. The ABC commendably stood by her, as they stood by Emma Alberici when the government was piling the pressure on. And we didn't call that attack on the ABC's supposed independence as a good thing for free speech - and nor should it be called so in the Yassmin case.

Like I said before, had Barnaby or Abetz simply said "I don't think what she said was appropriate etc, but she has a right to say it" - then that would have made all the difference. But they didn't - they specifically called for her to be sacked for it.



Yeee-usssh - but the fact remains that she wasn't sacked... big difference...

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/julie-bishop-resists-eric-abetzs-call-to-sack-yassmin-abdelmagied-20170508-gw0cbb.html

"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.

In a letter to Liberal senator Eric Abetz and obtained by Fairfax Media, Ms Bishop says that she had decided against "terminating" Ms Abdel-Magied from her position on the board of the Council for Australian-Arab Relations which is run by the ­Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade."


There's more - but being a silly bint and out of touch doesn't mean she is vicious and nasty and should be offered rape and death or sacking... she did apologise...

Abetz did call for her sacking.... I thought they should create her own comedy segment for her to air her views...  8-)


Pseudo Arab.


Exactly. She's more of a Jigaboo.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 12th, 2019 at 4:51pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 4:08pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 12:31pm:
How do you think it would fly with culture warriors like FD if Falua was able to keep his job with RA - provided he too agreed to undergo such humiliating grovelling and re-education?


I'm sure he'll be along shortly to tell us.


Oh, FD bailed after he was asked a question.

So unfair.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:48pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 12:31pm:
from Grappler's article:


Quote:
"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.


So this is what passes as 'free speech' eh?

Employees of the supposedly independent ABC are "free" to say what they want as long as they admit they were wrong, offer a grovelling apology and undergo re-education - whenever someone from the government gets hurt feeling by what they said?

FMD, it sounds more like something out of North Korea.

How do you think it would fly with culture warriors like FD if Falua was able to keep his job with RA - provided he too agreed to undergo such humiliating grovelling and re-education?



Don't get all uppity - Muslims actually kill people for much less - for a book they haven't read or cartoons published in a country they couldn't locate on a map, clothes not worn as they demand it, being a non-Muslims or the slightly different kind of Muslim.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:49pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 4:49pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 8:35am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:26am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 11:46am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 2:39pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.



Yassmin wasn't sacked ..................she left of her own accord.......... her sails filed with gales of laughter which took the wind out of her sails....


Never said she was. The ABC commendably stood by her, as they stood by Emma Alberici when the government was piling the pressure on. And we didn't call that attack on the ABC's supposed independence as a good thing for free speech - and nor should it be called so in the Yassmin case.

Like I said before, had Barnaby or Abetz simply said "I don't think what she said was appropriate etc, but she has a right to say it" - then that would have made all the difference. But they didn't - they specifically called for her to be sacked for it.



Yeee-usssh - but the fact remains that she wasn't sacked... big difference...

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/julie-bishop-resists-eric-abetzs-call-to-sack-yassmin-abdelmagied-20170508-gw0cbb.html

"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.

In a letter to Liberal senator Eric Abetz and obtained by Fairfax Media, Ms Bishop says that she had decided against "terminating" Ms Abdel-Magied from her position on the board of the Council for Australian-Arab Relations which is run by the ­Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade."


There's more - but being a silly bint and out of touch doesn't mean she is vicious and nasty and should be offered rape and death or sacking... she did apologise...

Abetz did call for her sacking.... I thought they should create her own comedy segment for her to air her views...  8-)


Pseudo Arab.


Exactly. She's more of a Jigaboo.

Lucky she's not a Paki like you.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Jul 12th, 2019 at 7:43pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 12:31pm:
from Grappler's article:


Quote:
"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.


So this is what passes as 'free speech' eh?

Employees of the supposedly independent ABC are "free" to say what they want as long as they admit they were wrong, offer a grovelling apology and undergo re-education - whenever someone from the government gets hurt feeling by what they said?

FMD, it sounds more like something out of North Korea.

How do you think it would fly with culture warriors like FD if Falua was able to keep his job with RA - provided he too agreed to undergo such humiliating grovelling and re-education?

Yassmin wasn't sacked.

Discuss.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:53am

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.


Some might have tried to make an issue of it. And failed.

Folau was sacked. Yassmin was not.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 13th, 2019 at 10:35am

Frank wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:49pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 4:49pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 8:35am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 12th, 2019 at 6:26am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 11th, 2019 at 11:46am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 2:39pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2019 at 11:48am:

freediver wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?


You are wrong FD. The culture warriors on the right would have made it an issue for exactly the same reason they worked so hard to make Yassmin's completely inoccuous tweet an issue. Which they did anyway, the first time he sent the tweet - and wasn't sacked for it. Its about sticking it to the progressives more than anything else. I believe this is your modus-operandi as well - you just think you're being more clever cloaking it in this legalistic narrative about rights of employment. You would obviously be back in witness protection had a muslim Rugby player been sacked for calling Islam the most feminist religion - or even a female muslim TV personality.



Yassmin wasn't sacked ..................she left of her own accord.......... her sails filed with gales of laughter which took the wind out of her sails....


Never said she was. The ABC commendably stood by her, as they stood by Emma Alberici when the government was piling the pressure on. And we didn't call that attack on the ABC's supposed independence as a good thing for free speech - and nor should it be called so in the Yassmin case.

Like I said before, had Barnaby or Abetz simply said "I don't think what she said was appropriate etc, but she has a right to say it" - then that would have made all the difference. But they didn't - they specifically called for her to be sacked for it.



Yeee-usssh - but the fact remains that she wasn't sacked... big difference...

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/julie-bishop-resists-eric-abetzs-call-to-sack-yassmin-abdelmagied-20170508-gw0cbb.html

"Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has resisted calls to sack Yassmin Abdel-Magied from a government advisory board over controversial Anzac Day comments because the ABC presenter has apologised for her "highly inappropriate" social media post and agreed to a mentoring program.

In a letter to Liberal senator Eric Abetz and obtained by Fairfax Media, Ms Bishop says that she had decided against "terminating" Ms Abdel-Magied from her position on the board of the Council for Australian-Arab Relations which is run by the ­Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade."


There's more - but being a silly bint and out of touch doesn't mean she is vicious and nasty and should be offered rape and death or sacking... she did apologise...

Abetz did call for her sacking.... I thought they should create her own comedy segment for her to air her views...  8-)


Pseudo Arab.


Exactly. She's more of a Jigaboo.

Lucky she's not a Paki like you.


Pakis are not Ayrabs, dear. What are they again?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:23pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:
Nope.  I can contract out of a right the UNHCR might seek to give me.

The bloke signed up for $M4 on conditions.  Breach them......bye bye.



My wife and I made a contract. She promised to love honour and obey. She signed that contract. Should I dissolve the contract when she refuses to obey or should she be forced to obey? It's not rape if she signed the contract, yeah? She signed away her human rights, it's on her head if she refuses.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:29pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:
Nope.  I can contract out of a right the UNHCR might seek to give me.

The bloke signed up for $M4 on conditions.  Breach them......bye bye.



My wife and I made a contract. She promised to love honour and obey. She signed that contract. Should I dissolve the contract when she refuses to obey or should she be forced to obey? It's not rape if she signed the contract, yeah? She signed away her human rights, it's on her head if she refuses.


Sue her.  Good luck.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:32pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:29pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:
Nope.  I can contract out of a right the UNHCR might seek to give me.

The bloke signed up for $M4 on conditions.  Breach them......bye bye.



My wife and I made a contract. She promised to love honour and obey. She signed that contract. Should I dissolve the contract when she refuses to obey or should she be forced to obey? It's not rape if she signed the contract, yeah? She signed away her human rights, it's on her head if she refuses.


Sue her.  Good luck.


Is that your shot at an easy out? Why don't RA sue IF?

Now, is marriage a contract?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:37pm
They don't need to sue him.  They booted him.

No.

(Edit:  It does give rise to some rights but none of the kind to which you refer.)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:46pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:37pm:
They don't need to sue him.  They booted him.

No.


For? You claimed he can and did sign away his human rights by signing a contract. I'm, saying so did my wife. Now since you know he can sign his away because of a contract, I'm posing to you my wife also signed hers away. Both are signed contracts.

Now stop trying to shake it off. It was your claim that one could sign away their human rights and that's what I'm picking you up on. You may not like the position you have now found yourself in with this claim but I would like you to answer it.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:56pm
I'm shaking nothing off.  I stand by what I said.  If Folau wants to claim some right under UNHCR, then let him say so.  He hasn't.  He can flaunt off to The Hague and try his luck there if he likes.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:01pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:56pm:
I'm shaking nothing off.  I stand by what I said.  If Folau wants to claim some right under UNHCR, then let him say so.  He hasn't.  He can flaunt off to The Hague and try his luck there if he likes.


You said people could sign(contract) away their human rights. That is what you said. All I'm doing is pointing out my wife did that too and I'm asking if she should obey the terms of her contract? Should she be forced to obey the contract?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:06pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:56pm:
I'm shaking nothing off.  I stand by what I said.  If Folau wants to claim some right under UNHCR, then let him say so.  He hasn't.  He can flaunt off to The Hague and try his luck there if he likes.


You said people could sign(contract) away their human rights. That is what you said. All I'm doing is pointing out my wife did that too and I'm asking if she should obey the terms of her contract? Should she be forced to obey the contract?



Is your wit as dim as your eye-sight?  I have said what I said.  Take it or leave it.  Let's see what the Court says.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:07pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:
Nope.  I can contract out of a right the UNHCR might seek to give me.

The bloke signed up for $M4 on conditions.  Breach them......bye bye.



My wife and I made a contract. She promised to love honour and obey. She signed that contract. Should I dissolve the contract when she refuses to obey or should she be forced to obey? It's not rape if she signed the contract, yeah? She signed away her human rights, it's on her head if she refuses.


No no, if she says you're going to hell, that's an out.

Give it a go if you want, dear.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:13pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:56pm:
I'm shaking nothing off.  I stand by what I said.  If Folau wants to claim some right under UNHCR, then let him say so.  He hasn't.  He can flaunt off to The Hague and try his luck there if he likes.


You said people could sign(contract) away their human rights. That is what you said. All I'm doing is pointing out my wife did that too and I'm asking if she should obey the terms of her contract? Should she be forced to obey the contract?



Is your wit as dim as your eye-sight?  I have said what I said.  Take it or leave it.  Let's see what the Court says.


Nice way to pike out on your words. Gutless really.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:15pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:07pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:
Nope.  I can contract out of a right the UNHCR might seek to give me.

The bloke signed up for $M4 on conditions.  Breach them......bye bye.



My wife and I made a contract. She promised to love honour and obey. She signed that contract. Should I dissolve the contract when she refuses to obey or should she be forced to obey? It's not rape if she signed the contract, yeah? She signed away her human rights, it's on her head if she refuses.


No no, if she says you're going to hell, that's an out.

Give it a go if you want, dear.


Wouldn't that be something for her to give a go, K? And she didn't say I'm going to hell, so where does that leave you? Jaded?

Do you think it was too hard a question for Aussie and the contract whiners?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:20pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:13pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:56pm:
I'm shaking nothing off.  I stand by what I said.  If Folau wants to claim some right under UNHCR, then let him say so.  He hasn't.  He can flaunt off to The Hague and try his luck there if he likes.


You said people could sign(contract) away their human rights. That is what you said. All I'm doing is pointing out my wife did that too and I'm asking if she should obey the terms of her contract? Should she be forced to obey the contract?



Is your wit as dim as your eye-sight?  I have said what I said.  Take it or leave it.  Let's see what the Court says.


Nice way to pike out on your words. Gutless really.


I am standing by my words.  Move on.  Let's see what the Court says.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:24pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:20pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:13pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:56pm:
I'm shaking nothing off.  I stand by what I said.  If Folau wants to claim some right under UNHCR, then let him say so.  He hasn't.  He can flaunt off to The Hague and try his luck there if he likes.


You said people could sign(contract) away their human rights. That is what you said. All I'm doing is pointing out my wife did that too and I'm asking if she should obey the terms of her contract? Should she be forced to obey the contract?



Is your wit as dim as your eye-sight?  I have said what I said.  Take it or leave it.  Let's see what the Court says.


Nice way to pike out on your words. Gutless really.


I am standing by my words.  Move on.  Let's see what the Court says.


So my wife and all women should obey their contracts as IF should? Good to know. I wonder what Mothra thinks of your decision to support contracts over human rights.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:30pm
You have not read what I said about your husband/wife contract.  Maybe you should.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:35pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:30pm:
You have not read what I said about your husband/wife contract.  Maybe you should.


That I should sue her? I can't legally do that and it's besides the point, RA are not trying to sue IF, you are just trying to squirm and not answer what I asked. You are the one that said you could sign away your human rights via a contract, all I'm trying to do is clarify that. You gutlessly refuse to do so. I wonder why? There was no mention of "wait for the courts" in your post so why are you doing that now? You made the claim and I'm calling you on it.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:48pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:35pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:30pm:
You have not read what I said about your husband/wife contract.  Maybe you should.


That I should sue her? I can't legally do that and it's besides the point, RA are not trying to sue IF, you are just trying to squirm and not answer what I asked. You are the one that said you could sign away your human rights via a contract, all I'm trying to do is clarify that. You gutlessly refuse to do so. I wonder why? There was no mention of "wait for the courts" in your post so why are you doing that now? You made the claim and I'm calling you on it.


So what?  You have your view, I have mine.  Let the Court decide.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:55pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:35pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:30pm:
You have not read what I said about your husband/wife contract.  Maybe you should.


That I should sue her? I can't legally do that and it's besides the point, RA are not trying to sue IF, you are just trying to squirm and not answer what I asked. You are the one that said you could sign away your human rights via a contract, all I'm trying to do is clarify that. You gutlessly refuse to do so. I wonder why? There was no mention of "wait for the courts" in your post so why are you doing that now? You made the claim and I'm calling you on it.


So what?  You have your view, I have mine.  Let the Court decide.


I'm not questioning the courts, Aussie. You made a statement, you are apparently a lawyer, yeah? You said you could contract away your human rights. That's not up to the courts, it's your statement, your claim. Stop trying to offload your claim to the courts and man up. Perhaps it's only human rights you don't want people to have that can be signed away? Are you a hypocrite?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:58pm
I said that Folau was able to contract out of a UNHCR matter.  If I am wrong, the Court will say so, assuming Folau takes that tack.

You can flap your gums as much as you like.  I don't have to accommodate you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:01pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:58pm:
I said that Folau was able to contract out of a UNHCR matter.  If I am wrong, the Court will say so, assuming Folau takes that tack.

You can flap your gums as much as you like.  I don't have to accommodate you.


You made the claim. What sound does a jellyfish make?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:08pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:58pm:
I said that Folau was able to contract out of a UNHCR matter.  If I am wrong, the Court will say so, assuming Folau takes that tack.

You can flap your gums as much as you like.  I don't have to accommodate you.


You made the claim. What sound does a jellyfish make?


Ask freediver.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:09pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:08pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:58pm:
I said that Folau was able to contract out of a UNHCR matter.  If I am wrong, the Court will say so, assuming Folau takes that tack.

You can flap your gums as much as you like.  I don't have to accommodate you.


You made the claim. What sound does a jellyfish make?


Ask freediver.


You not willing to make a sound?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:18pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:08pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:58pm:
I said that Folau was able to contract out of a UNHCR matter.  If I am wrong, the Court will say so, assuming Folau takes that tack.

You can flap your gums as much as you like.  I don't have to accommodate you.


You made the claim. What sound does a jellyfish make?


Ask freediver.


You not willing to make a sound?


I have been 'making a sound' for the last several minutes with you, but, as is usual, you have no capacity to understand when one side of a discussion has said all they have to say.  My PM inbox is replete with similar examples.

Go ask FD what sound a jellyfish makes.  Try your luck with him.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:24pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:15pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:07pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:23pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 8th, 2019 at 5:24pm:
Nope.  I can contract out of a right the UNHCR might seek to give me.

The bloke signed up for $M4 on conditions.  Breach them......bye bye.



My wife and I made a contract. She promised to love honour and obey. She signed that contract. Should I dissolve the contract when she refuses to obey or should she be forced to obey? It's not rape if she signed the contract, yeah? She signed away her human rights, it's on her head if she refuses.


No no, if she says you're going to hell, that's an out.

Give it a go if you want, dear.


Wouldn't that be something for her to give a go, K? And she didn't say I'm going to hell, so where does that leave you? Jaded?


No no, tinted. Dirty little invert, innit.

I do see your point though, dear. You're highlighting the similarities between contract and family law. Sort of a Venn diagram, so to speak.

Should we do the right thing and blame Islam?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:25pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:08pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:58pm:
I said that Folau was able to contract out of a UNHCR matter.  If I am wrong, the Court will say so, assuming Folau takes that tack.

You can flap your gums as much as you like.  I don't have to accommodate you.


You made the claim. What sound does a jellyfish make?


Ask freediver.


You not willing to make a sound?


What sound does a jellyfish make?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:26pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:18pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:08pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:58pm:
I said that Folau was able to contract out of a UNHCR matter.  If I am wrong, the Court will say so, assuming Folau takes that tack.

You can flap your gums as much as you like.  I don't have to accommodate you.


You made the claim. What sound does a jellyfish make?


Ask freediver.


You not willing to make a sound?


I have been 'making a sound' for the last several minutes with you, but, as is usual, you have no capacity to understand when one side of a discussion has said all they have to say.  My PM inbox is replete with similar examples.

Go ask FD what sound a jellyfish makes.  Try your luck with him.


FD won't answer that, Aussie.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 13th, 2019 at 9:49pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:24pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:20pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:13pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:06pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 7:56pm:
I'm shaking nothing off.  I stand by what I said.  If Folau wants to claim some right under UNHCR, then let him say so.  He hasn't.  He can flaunt off to The Hague and try his luck there if he likes.


You said people could sign(contract) away their human rights. That is what you said. All I'm doing is pointing out my wife did that too and I'm asking if she should obey the terms of her contract? Should she be forced to obey the contract?



Is your wit as dim as your eye-sight?  I have said what I said.  Take it or leave it.  Let's see what the Court says.


Nice way to pike out on your words. Gutless really.


I am standing by my words.  Move on.  Let's see what the Court says.


So my wife and all women should obey their contracts as IF should? Good to know. I wonder what Mothra thinks of your decision to support contracts over human rights.


Well, actually, dear, contract law surpasses human rights. The US has a Bill of Rights that people routinely sign away in employment contracts.

Mr Trump's employees and floozies always sign non-disclosure agreements, for example. All his wives do. Employees in the US often sign contracts that warn of disciplinary action for unwanted social media use. Many positions have codes of conduct that regulate your speech outside the workplace.

Australia doesn't even have a Bill of Rights. They can do what they want, dear. It's their world.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 13th, 2019 at 10:57pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:24pm:
So my wife and all women should obey their contracts as IF should?



don't assume all wives are so stupid as to 'promise to obey'.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 13th, 2019 at 11:26pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 10:57pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 13th, 2019 at 8:24pm:
So my wife and all women should obey their contracts as IF should?



don't assume all wives are so stupid as to 'promise to obey'.


Setanta might have himself a nice little Filipina lass, JS. They always promise.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by rhino on Jul 14th, 2019 at 12:37am

John Smith wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:01pm:

rhino wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 7:59pm:
Ben Cousins has lots of people who think hes a role model, most of them are in prison. Not sure what that proves.



it proves that he is a role model. No more, no less.
whoosh!

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:56am
There are plenty of inalienable rights that you cannot sign away in a contract. Otherwise all our employment laws would be paper tigers. Hence terms like illegal and unenforceable clauses. If there was a real ex-lawyer in the house they would have no trouble explaining.

Aussie thinks it is legal in Australia to put clauses in your contract that allow you to rape your employees. No wonder he thinks Folau is screwed.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:26am

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:56am:
There are plenty of inalienable rights that you cannot sign away in a contract. Otherwise all our employment laws would be paper tigers. Hence terms like illegal and unenforceable clauses. If there was a real ex-lawyer in the house they would have no trouble explaining.

Aussie thinks it is legal in Australia to put clauses in your contract that allow you to rape your employees. No wonder he thinks Folau is screwed.


Link me to where I said I think that Effendi.  I'll bet you can't.  I have never said anything about being allowed to rape employees, but that seems not to deter you from putting false words into my mouth.

And, Effendi, really.  When you invite people here you require that they sign up to your contract.  Some might argue that your contract encroaches on the rights you say Folau cannot sign away.  Yet, you enforce your contract and think nothing of it.  So, why do you deny RA the same capacity?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 14th, 2019 at 12:03pm
You know what FD's answer will be to that one, don't you, Aussie?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 14th, 2019 at 12:34pm
Big difference between a religion that says you'll go to hell if you continue your kind of behaviour, and one that offers to give you hell on earth and then send you to hell at knife point ..... even if you are not guilty ...

Subtle difference, I know, but still..

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 14th, 2019 at 12:56pm

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:56am:
There are plenty of inalienable rights that you cannot sign away in a contract. Otherwise all our employment laws would be paper tigers. Hence terms like illegal and unenforceable clauses. If there was a real ex-lawyer in the house they would have no trouble explaining.

Aussie thinks it is legal in Australia to put clauses in your contract that allow you to rape your employees. No wonder he thinks Folau is screwed.


It is unreasonable to dictate to employers that they have no say in how their employees can conduct themselves on public forums FD.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:02pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 12:56pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:56am:
There are plenty of inalienable rights that you cannot sign away in a contract. Otherwise all our employment laws would be paper tigers. Hence terms like illegal and unenforceable clauses. If there was a real ex-lawyer in the house they would have no trouble explaining.

Aussie thinks it is legal in Australia to put clauses in your contract that allow you to rape your employees. No wonder he thinks Folau is screwed.


It is unreasonable to dictate to employers that they have no say in how their employees can conduct themselves on public forums FD.


If they are not displaying/using any company/ employer identification & in their own time in private ......... then why should an employer dictate what you say in your private life on a public forum that has nothing to do with your workplace?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Secret Wars on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:08pm
I would have expected a bunch of lefty unionist types to be keen to limit the authority and reach of an employer into private life, but instead, it’s been almost the exact opposite.

Not enough privilege points Folau, if only you had been darker and Muslim... and not a bogan sportsman.  :)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:15pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:02pm:
If they are not displaying/using any company/ employer identification & in their own time in private ......... then why should an employer dictate what you say in your private life on a public forum that has nothing to do with your workplace?



If it costs your employer customers, he has every right to act. Whether you have the company logo on your facebook page or not is irrelevant. Whilst you are an employee of theirs, you represent the company. 

Are you going to argue that if you had staff and they posted something that cost you, or had the potential to cost you, hundreds of thousands in revenue, you wouldn't act? Pull the other one. Most of you wouldn't even give him a warning or a second chance.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:31pm
gnads, when your employer specifically markets themselves as an anti homophobic organisation, and regularly makes PR promotions supporting gay rights - then suddenly being homophobic has everything to do with your workplace.

This is a point the critics seems unable to grasp - the fact that being employed by RA includes a lot more responsibilities than merely playing Rugby well.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:35pm
Haven't yet met a person who says an individual's personal views somehow reflect on the good name of the company they work for...

People just consider it to be their personal view, unless it is an extreme like gassing Jews or something....scarcely any comparison with a religious view that harms nobody.....now if Israel Folau had said that unless homos and drunks etc mend their ways  his religious sect would be chopping off their heads after committing them to flames or that his religious observance meant banning anyone else outside the group from 40km of coastline etc..... and he would be first in line with the flaming brand and the goon squads banning the access to the beach for thousands...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:36pm

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:08pm:
I would have expected a bunch of lefty unionist types to be keen to limit the authority and reach of an employer into private life, but instead, it’s been almost the exact opposite.

Not enough privilege points Folau, if only you had been darker and Muslim... and not a bogan sportsman.  :)


If you took your partisan cap off for just one second secret, you would see where the glaring hypocricy lies-  and its not with the 'lefty unionist types'. Its actually the topic of this thread - comparing Folau and Yassmin - and the rank hypocricy of people like Eric Abetz who called for Yassmin's head for a tweet, then cries 'attack on freedom' when RA goes and does to Folau what they were demanding of Yassmin.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:38pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:02pm:
If they are not displaying/using any company/ employer identification & in their own time in private ......... then why should an employer dictate what you say in your private life on a public forum that has nothing to do with your workplace?



If it costs your employer customers, he has every right to act. Whether you have the company logo on your facebook page or not is irrelevant. Whilst you are an employee of theirs, you represent the company. 

Are you going to argue that if you had staff and they posted something that cost you, or had the potential to cost you, hundreds of thousands in revenue, you wouldn't act? Pull the other one. Most of you wouldn't even give him a warning or a second chance.


So now people are going to flood to stay away from Rugby because Israel Folau said that sinners would burn in hell?

I doubt it.... Rugby fans are more likely to show up with pitch-forks and wave banners saying "Burn in Hell, All Blacks!" and so forth.... or even take the piss out of Israel...  "Give 'Em Hell, Izzie!"  "God is on Our Side!" .....  ;D  ;D  ;D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:42pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:38pm:
So now people are going to flood to stay away from Rugby because Israel Folau said that sinners would burn in hell?


No, the sponsors are the ones they are worried about.

QANTAS is their main backer I believe, and they were said to be putting pressure on RA.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Secret Wars on Jul 14th, 2019 at 2:04pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:36pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:08pm:
I would have expected a bunch of lefty unionist types to be keen to limit the authority and reach of an employer into private life, but instead, it’s been almost the exact opposite.

Not enough privilege points Folau, if only you had been darker and Muslim... and not a bogan sportsman.  :)


If you took your partisan cap off for just one second secret, you would see where the glaring hypocricy lies-  and its not with the 'lefty unionist types'. Its actually the topic of this thread - comparing Folau and Yassmin - and the rank hypocricy of people like Eric Abetz who called for Yassmin's head for a tweet, then cries 'attack on freedom' when RA goes and does to Folau what they were demanding of Yassmin.


My position has always been consistent, employers have no place dictating what any one does with their own social media albeit they can proscribe posting about that employment, and I hope that a court will affirm that.

And my partisan cap remains, the forum clowns who would ordinarily revolt against an employer dictating what an employee can post on their own social media have weighed up the privilege points and found for ...the employer.   Being a Christian is trumps obviously.  ::)

Cos a contract.  Even with Sally McManus pointing the way they still find themselves wid da man. Bring back grapes of wrath employment contracts cos the clowns here have rolled over.

Eric Abetz can speak for himself.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 14th, 2019 at 2:09pm

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:08pm:
I would have expected a bunch of lefty unionist types to be keen to limit the authority and reach of an employer into private life, but instead, it’s been almost the exact opposite.

Not enough privilege points Folau, if only you had been darker and Muslim... and not a bogan sportsman.  :)


Folou is hardly receiving an award wage, dear. He has a contract, with highly-paid agents and lawyers.

You?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Secret Wars on Jul 14th, 2019 at 2:13pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 2:09pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:08pm:
I would have expected a bunch of lefty unionist types to be keen to limit the authority and reach of an employer into private life, but instead, it’s been almost the exact opposite.

Not enough privilege points Folau, if only you had been darker and Muslim... and not a bogan sportsman.  :)


Folou is hardly receiving an award wage, dear. He has a contract, with highly-paid agents and lawyers.

You?


Me what?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Valkie on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:36pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:35pm:
Haven't yet met a person who says an individual's personal views somehow reflect on the good name of the company they work for...

People just consider it to be their personal view, unless it is an extreme like gassing Jews or something....scarcely any comparison with a religious view that harms nobody.....now if Israel Folau had said that unless homos and drunks etc mend their ways  his religious sect would be chopping off their heads after committing them to flames or that his religious observance meant banning anyone else outside the group from 40km of coastline etc..... and he would be first in line with the flaming brand and the goon squads banning the access to the beach for thousands...


You mean like....oh I don't know.....
Behead all who insult Islam, Muhammid,  etc etc?
Or kill all infidels?
Or murder all jews?

Or is this type of cultish freedom acceptable, as long as it's Muzzo?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:40pm

Valkie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:36pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:35pm:
Haven't yet met a person who says an individual's personal views somehow reflect on the good name of the company they work for...

People just consider it to be their personal view, unless it is an extreme like gassing Jews or something....scarcely any comparison with a religious view that harms nobody.....now if Israel Folau had said that unless homos and drunks etc mend their ways  his religious sect would be chopping off their heads after committing them to flames or that his religious observance meant banning anyone else outside the group from 40km of coastline etc..... and he would be first in line with the flaming brand and the goon squads banning the access to the beach for thousands...


You mean like....oh I don't know.....
Behead all who insult Islam, Muhammid,  etc etc?
Or kill all infidels?
Or murder all jews?

Or is this type of cultish freedom acceptable, as long as it's Muzzo?


I'll bet that if any Rugby player posted that stuff under their real name....they'd have their contract ripped up.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 14th, 2019 at 4:52pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:38pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:15pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:02pm:
If they are not displaying/using any company/ employer identification & in their own time in private ......... then why should an employer dictate what you say in your private life on a public forum that has nothing to do with your workplace?



If it costs your employer customers, he has every right to act. Whether you have the company logo on your facebook page or not is irrelevant. Whilst you are an employee of theirs, you represent the company. 

Are you going to argue that if you had staff and they posted something that cost you, or had the potential to cost you, hundreds of thousands in revenue, you wouldn't act? Pull the other one. Most of you wouldn't even give him a warning or a second chance.


So now people are going to flood to stay away from Rugby because Israel Folau said that sinners would burn in hell?

I doubt it.... Rugby fans are more likely to show up with pitch-forks and wave banners saying "Burn in Hell, All Blacks!" and so forth.... or even take the piss out of Israel...  "Give 'Em Hell, Izzie!"  "God is on Our Side!" .....  ;D  ;D  ;D


you doubt it? So the sponsors didn't threaten to pull their sponsorship money?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 14th, 2019 at 4:54pm

Valkie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:36pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:35pm:
Haven't yet met a person who says an individual's personal views somehow reflect on the good name of the company they work for...

People just consider it to be their personal view, unless it is an extreme like gassing Jews or something....scarcely any comparison with a religious view that harms nobody.....now if Israel Folau had said that unless homos and drunks etc mend their ways  his religious sect would be chopping off their heads after committing them to flames or that his religious observance meant banning anyone else outside the group from 40km of coastline etc..... and he would be first in line with the flaming brand and the goon squads banning the access to the beach for thousands...


You mean like....oh I don't know.....
Behead all who insult Islam, Muhammid,  etc etc?
Or kill all infidels?
Or murder all jews?

Or is this type of cultish freedom acceptable, as long as it's Muzzo?


Well - I did differentiate between expressions of extreme religious cultism and everyday things...

You're not allowed to discuss things like that... might upset someone's sensitivities...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 14th, 2019 at 4:54pm

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 2:04pm:
My position has always been consistent, employers have no place dictating what any one does with their own social media albeit they can proscribe posting about that employment, and I hope that a court will affirm that.



So if you had staff and they posted something that cost your business, or had the potential to cost it, hundreds of thousands in revenue, you wouldn't act?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 14th, 2019 at 4:56pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:40pm:

Valkie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:36pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:35pm:
Haven't yet met a person who says an individual's personal views somehow reflect on the good name of the company they work for...

People just consider it to be their personal view, unless it is an extreme like gassing Jews or something....scarcely any comparison with a religious view that harms nobody.....now if Israel Folau had said that unless homos and drunks etc mend their ways  his religious sect would be chopping off their heads after committing them to flames or that his religious observance meant banning anyone else outside the group from 40km of coastline etc..... and he would be first in line with the flaming brand and the goon squads banning the access to the beach for thousands...


You mean like....oh I don't know.....
Behead all who insult Islam, Muhammid,  etc etc?
Or kill all infidels?
Or murder all jews?

Or is this type of cultish freedom acceptable, as long as it's Muzzo?


I'll bet that if any Rugby player posted that stuff under their real name....they'd have their contract ripped up.



And I'd also bet the hypocrites crying about freedom of speech would still not be satisfied, and would demand blood as well.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 14th, 2019 at 5:12pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 4:56pm:
And I'd also bet the hypocrites crying about freedom of speech would still not be satisfied, and would demand blood as well



There could be some virtue and value in what you suggest here, Smith - perhaps I've been underestimating you ...

Which group do you want chopped first?  Feminists?  Abos?  Mussos?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 14th, 2019 at 5:15pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 4:54pm:

Secret Wars wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 2:04pm:
My position has always been consistent, employers have no place dictating what any one does with their own social media albeit they can proscribe posting about that employment, and I hope that a court will affirm that.



So if you had staff and they posted something that cost your business, or had the potential to cost it, hundreds of thousands in revenue, you wouldn't act?


A personal religious view can do all that?

Who'd 've thunk it?

You still haven't answered how it could possibly cost RA for Folau to make a religious statement based on personal belief.... I don't see the diehard Rugby fans staying away....... but then ... we all know you limit your statements to anything that will seek to bring down the other poster.... can't rely on your for any supporting fact or anything....

When and where has this ever happened?  You know - this terrible outcome for a business from a private post in own time by an employee?  The poofs not going to Rugby matches?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:17pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 4:56pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:40pm:

Valkie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 3:36pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:35pm:
Haven't yet met a person who says an individual's personal views somehow reflect on the good name of the company they work for...

People just consider it to be their personal view, unless it is an extreme like gassing Jews or something....scarcely any comparison with a religious view that harms nobody.....now if Israel Folau had said that unless homos and drunks etc mend their ways  his religious sect would be chopping off their heads after committing them to flames or that his religious observance meant banning anyone else outside the group from 40km of coastline etc..... and he would be first in line with the flaming brand and the goon squads banning the access to the beach for thousands...


You mean like....oh I don't know.....
Behead all who insult Islam, Muhammid,  etc etc?
Or kill all infidels?
Or murder all jews?

Or is this type of cultish freedom acceptable, as long as it's Muzzo?


I'll bet that if any Rugby player posted that stuff under their real name....they'd have their contract ripped up.



And I'd also bet the hypocrites crying about freedom of speech would still not be satisfied, and would demand blood as well.


I don't know if you include me in that but to me it's not an issue of freedom of speech, it's freedom of religious expression. I'm not religious in any way but that freedom of religious expression is something everyone should have if any have it. It'd make me enormously happy if we didn't have to deal with religious views, but we do.

As I have said before, I have no idea why people that don't follow that faith get all torn up when someone expresses what their religion states. Sure call it out for the crap it is but to carry on like he personally has lit the fires of his supposed hell and pitchforking poofs, atheists, drunkards, etc, etc is just crap. He's just stating what his worthless book says. It doesn't offend me that I'm on his god's list.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 12:56pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:56am:
There are plenty of inalienable rights that you cannot sign away in a contract. Otherwise all our employment laws would be paper tigers. Hence terms like illegal and unenforceable clauses. If there was a real ex-lawyer in the house they would have no trouble explaining.

Aussie thinks it is legal in Australia to put clauses in your contract that allow you to rape your employees. No wonder he thinks Folau is screwed.


It is unreasonable to dictate to employers that they have no say in how their employees can conduct themselves on public forums FD.


That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:22pm

Quote:
That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


There you go yet again with a cute little nuanced tapdance, avoiding the facts and instead overlaying a non-existent circumstance.  He was not fired for being a 'Christian.'


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:41pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:22pm:

Quote:
That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


There you go yet again with a cute little nuanced tapdance, avoiding the facts and instead overlaying a non-existent circumstance.  He was not fired for being a 'Christian.'


He was fired because he said what his book of fables said. Such is the life a "believer".

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:53pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:41pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:22pm:

Quote:
That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


There you go yet again with a cute little nuanced tapdance, avoiding the facts and instead overlaying a non-existent circumstance.  He was not fired for being a 'Christian.'


He was fired because he said what his book of fables said. Such is the life a "believer".



he was fired because he breached the code of conduct he agreed to in exchange for $4m

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:59pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:41pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:22pm:

Quote:
That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


There you go yet again with a cute little nuanced tapdance, avoiding the facts and instead overlaying a non-existent circumstance.  He was not fired for being a 'Christian.'


He was fired because he said what his book of fables said. Such is the life a "believer".


Indeed.  Don't sign up to receive $M4 in exchange for keeping your book of fables out of the www if you want to keep the $M4 at the cost of NOT posting the fables.

As I have said before.....I 'employ' one moderate Bible Basher.  He knows, because I have told him, that if he preaches to the people in my Cab, I will take him out of the Cab.  He was very quick to tell me that he would never do that.  He is a great driver, bloody good bloke and earns excellent money for himself.

There is another called The Preacher.  He was begging me to give him a drive.  I always declined because the first thing he does in the Car owned by the Cab Licence holder is adorn it with God Bothering baubles.  I don't care that he believes.  I simply do not want him to take advantage of the exposure to the public which I provide him, to push his schit.

Same thing RA/Folau.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:11pm

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?



Let me try to dumb it down for you. He was fired for breaching his code of conduct.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:20pm

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


Effendi...what do you reckon about this provision in a Contract?  Enforceable?


Quote:
Do not use sexual orientation to flame or to try to put someone down.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Mr Hammer on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:25pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:59pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:41pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:22pm:

Quote:
That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


There you go yet again with a cute little nuanced tapdance, avoiding the facts and instead overlaying a non-existent circumstance.  He was not fired for being a 'Christian.'


He was fired because he said what his book of fables said. Such is the life a "believer".


Indeed.  Don't sign up to receive $M4 in exchange for keeping your book of fables out of the www if you want to keep the $M4 at the cost of NOT posting the fables.

As I have said before.....I 'employ' one moderate Bible Basher.  He knows, because I have told him, that if he preaches to the people in my Cab, I will take him out of the Cab.  He was very quick to tell me that he would never do that.  He is a great driver, bloody good bloke and earns excellent money for himself.

There is another called The Preacher.  He was begging me to give him a drive.  I always declined because the first thing he does in the Car owned by the Cab Licence holder is adorn it with God Bothering baubles.  I don't care that he believes.  I simply do not want him to take advantage of the exposure to the public which I provide him, to push his schit.

Same thing RA/Folau.

You write bad things on the www. Should you be fired for it? Some of the stuff that has come out of your head is 1,000 worse than burning in hell comments. Signing up for a work contract shouldn't mean that it's restricts what you can write about your religion in your spare time. That's slavery. This Rugby Union contract has stepped way beyond the bounds of individual civil liberties.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Mr Hammer on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:26pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?



Let me try to dumb it down for you. He was fired for breaching his code of conduct.
And the fact that Joyce threatened to pull QANTAS sponsorship.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Mr Hammer on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:30pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:20pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


Effendi...what do you reckon about this provision in a Contract?  Enforceable?


Quote:
Do not use sexual orientation to flame or to try to put someone down.

Rugby Australia Code of Conduct





Rugby Australia Code of Conduct  9

3 CODE OF CONDUCT – ADMINISTRATORS, OFFICERS OF A RUGBY BODY
3.1 The safety, health and welfare of players comes first.  Be aware of, and always comply with, the Rugby AU Safety Policies and Guidelines and be alert to minimise dangerous or foul play.
3.2 Treat everyone equally regardless of gender or gender identity, sexual orientation, ethnicity, cultural or religious background, age or disability. Any form of bullying, harassment or discrimination has no place in Rugby.


Doesn't look like it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:32pm

Quote:
You write bad things on the www. Should you be fired for it?


Yes.....if you posted it in such a way as associates your employer with it.


Quote:
Some of the stuff that has come out of your head is 1,000 worse than burning in hell comments.


Like what?


Quote:
Signing up for a work contract shouldn't mean that it's restricts what you can write about your religion in your spare time. That's slavery.


I don't agree with your premise, but the final point is......don't sign up.  Don't take the cash.


Quote:
This Rugby Union contract has stepped way beyond the bounds of individual civil liberties.


Again, I don't agree with your premise.....but, all Folau had to do was decline the $M4.  Simple stuff.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:43pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:25pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:59pm:

Setanta wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:41pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:22pm:

Quote:
That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


There you go yet again with a cute little nuanced tapdance, avoiding the facts and instead overlaying a non-existent circumstance.  He was not fired for being a 'Christian.'


He was fired because he said what his book of fables said. Such is the life a "believer".


Indeed.  Don't sign up to receive $M4 in exchange for keeping your book of fables out of the www if you want to keep the $M4 at the cost of NOT posting the fables.

As I have said before.....I 'employ' one moderate Bible Basher.  He knows, because I have told him, that if he preaches to the people in my Cab, I will take him out of the Cab.  He was very quick to tell me that he would never do that.  He is a great driver, bloody good bloke and earns excellent money for himself.

There is another called The Preacher.  He was begging me to give him a drive.  I always declined because the first thing he does in the Car owned by the Cab Licence holder is adorn it with God Bothering baubles.  I don't care that he believes.  I simply do not want him to take advantage of the exposure to the public which I provide him, to push his schit.

Same thing RA/Folau.

You write bad things on the www. Should you be fired for it? Some of the stuff that has come out of your head is 1,000 worse than burning in hell comments. Signing up for a work contract shouldn't mean that it's restricts what you can write about your religion in your spare time. That's slavery. This Rugby Union contract has stepped way beyond the bounds of individual civil liberties.


Aussie's not posting under his name, Homo.

You?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:46pm

Setanta wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:41pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:22pm:

Quote:
That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


There you go yet again with a cute little nuanced tapdance, avoiding the facts and instead overlaying a non-existent circumstance.  He was not fired for being a 'Christian.'


He was fired because he said what his book of fables said. Such is the life a "believer".


So cute to see you sticking up for the believers, dear. Where does Folou's book of fables say what Folou said?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:48pm

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


Did you ban JS for his views, FD?

Or for disagreeing with yours?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:49pm

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 12:56pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 7:56am:
There are plenty of inalienable rights that you cannot sign away in a contract. Otherwise all our employment laws would be paper tigers. Hence terms like illegal and unenforceable clauses. If there was a real ex-lawyer in the house they would have no trouble explaining.

Aussie thinks it is legal in Australia to put clauses in your contract that allow you to rape your employees. No wonder he thinks Folau is screwed.


It is unreasonable to dictate to employers that they have no say in how their employees can conduct themselves on public forums FD.


That is not what is happening. The law forbids firing people for their religious views. Employers can still have plenty of say outside of that. You can probably still get fired for trashing your boss on facebook.


Can you be banned for being a jellyfish?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:17am

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?



Let me try to dumb it down for you. He was fired for breaching his code of conduct.


Why do the homofascists act like this? A simple yes or no will suffice John, if you are not too scared of being honest for once. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:37am
A far better comparison would be between Israel Folau and that fat chick in Malbadishu who wanted to burn the nation down over 'Indigenous rights'....

Did she cop the sack from her public-funded jobs for making inflammatory and frankly violent statements in public?  Or does she have too many brownie points for being part-Aboriginal, a sheila, and weight enhanced and thus somewhat disabled?

As John Jarratt said about why that 'case' even went before a court - the DPP people are so frightened of not appearing to 'stand up for the rights of the victim' that they'll throw such a thing to a court and thus wash their hands of any responsibility.. and they do that without a single care for the real victim. 

In that case, they'd never sack the fat bint because of the bad press that the screechers would generate about 'discrimination', 'racism' and so forth..   ;D  ;D  ::)  ::)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:45am

Karnal wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


Did you ban JS for his views, FD?

Or for disagreeing with yours?


JS bears full responsibility for his own abuse of other users.. if he were not such good comedy material and so easy to poke a stick at, he'd be reported on a daily basis...

Now if only he would come up with a sensible response to any other post for a change.... but like ever so many, he mistakes blindlly adhering to any 'poor me' issue for being on the side of the angels and as if it's some kind of holy writ, and lacks the mental capacity to actually consider it in full and then discuss it like a reasonable human being.

For example, he blindly accepts any 'issue' raised by our Indigenous brethren, without a moment's thought for the often dire impact on others of such endless demands, and he is quite incapable of discussing with equanimity the reality that those who often make the decisions in favour of these demands, do so from a position of fear of an adverse response and vicious name-calling unless they do.

One hint of the word 'racist' etc, and they run and hide and give to Kaffirs/Mussos/Gays/Mentals/feminists (no capital intended as a sign of contempt) anything they demand or even might demand.

BTW - who was it that ever gave those bodies the right to dispense with our rights and our land and so forth, without so much as a by-you-leave from We, The People?

How about a blanket decree of NO right now - a total moratorium on any claims from these groups - and then we'll start again from the bottom with a full review of all those claims going back twenty-five years or so?

Money better spent than just continuing to hand out everything to losers on demand.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:46am

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:17am:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?



Let me try to dumb it down for you. He was fired for breaching his code of conduct.


Why do the homofascists act like this? A simple yes or no will suffice John, if you are not too scared of being honest for once. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


Was JS banned for not saying what you want?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:47am

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:17am:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?



Let me try to dumb it down for you. He was fired for breaching his code of conduct.


Why do the homofascists act like this? A simple yes or no will suffice John, if you are not too scared of being honest for once. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


Smithy is incapable of reasoned discussion and of even answering a question.... we retain his services for comedy value and to give us a little diversion, through having someone  to poke a stick at...

A very sad reflection on our better style of Italian import .... and clear evidence of the need to impose provisional citizenship, perhaps, on that evidence, for three generations, so as to ensure Australian Purity...

BTW - dual citizens should get half pension and unemployment benefits etc.... bit hard to pick up social security when  you're straddling a barbed wire fence or sitting on a high ethnic horse ....

About time to bring the meat of the situation to them in full... same as many another 'issue' doing the rounds....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:49am
FD didn't ban JS for abuse, dear.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:27am
**shick, schik.. BOOM ...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 15th, 2019 at 12:43pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:42pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:38pm:
So now people are going to flood to stay away from Rugby because Israel Folau said that sinners would burn in hell?


No, the sponsors are the ones they are worried about.

QANTAS is their main backer I believe, and they were said to be putting pressure on RA.



Joyce denies that.

And it's not "Qantas" ... it's Joyce.

Why should he be able to hide behind the company logo & assert influence on RA to deal with Folau?

Afterall Joyce is just an employee of the company.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 15th, 2019 at 12:44pm
**

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 15th, 2019 at 12:44pm
##

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:05pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:49am:
FD didn't ban JS for abuse, dear.



Lucky for Herr Schmidt - he'd never see the light of day ........

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:07pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Good work, Greggery. Now, would you like FD to answer a question?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:09pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:07pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Good work, Greggery. Now, would you like FD to answer a question?


That would be splendid.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:14pm

Gnads wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 12:43pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:42pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:38pm:
So now people are going to flood to stay away from Rugby because Israel Folau said that sinners would burn in hell?


No, the sponsors are the ones they are worried about.

QANTAS is their main backer I believe, and they were said to be putting pressure on RA.



Joyce denies that.

And it's not "Qantas" ... it's Joyce.

Why should he be able to hide behind the company logo & assert influence on RA to deal with Folau?

Afterall Joyce is just an employee of the company.


No, dear, Joyce is appointed by the board.

And I believe this decision was discussed by the board.

But that's irrelevant. The team is the team. Why should sponsorship have anything to do with who they select to play? This was RA's decision.

Without Folou, apparently their best player ever, they should expect to lose sponsorship too. After all, Folou, as every schoolboy knows, is the reason they win.

A devil's choice, innit?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:07pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Good work, Greggery. Now, would you like FD to answer a question?



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 15th, 2019 at 3:21pm
How about the legality if this Effendi (or anyone) ~  found in a Club Constitution.
IMG.jpg (85 KB | 8 )

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 15th, 2019 at 3:27pm
Take two:


IMG_001.jpg (85 KB | 6 )

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 15th, 2019 at 3:27pm
Blah!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 4:20pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


FD's not defending religious speech, G, he's defending hate speech.

Remember, when Yassmin Tweeted something as harmless as lest we forget refugees, FD defended the rape and death threats that followed - to the letter.

For FD, a tinted Muslim woman comparing the plight of refuges to Australians killed in foreign wars deserved everything she got, whether she was expressing her religious views or not.

Likewise, FD's not defending Folou's right to spruik the message of his prophet, he's defending Folou's right to slag off the hommers.

FD hasn't defended religious freedom since "he changed his mind" in 2007. FD is now of the opinion that those who follow the religion of Islam should be banned. FD wants them asked cunning questions on their visa applications - questions designed to trip them up, agree that they support genocide, want to kill gays who do it Mardi Gras-style and tough-titties, off with their treacherous heads.

In fact, why ask them at all? They have to believe this, they're Muslims. They don't share the same values as Whitey. The purpose of the visa questions is to get them to admit that they can't live among civilised people so you can knock them back, but still maintain you believe in freedom.

FD's always been rather quiet about what to do with the ones like you; citizens who convert. He hopes you'll sneak off to fight in some foreign war so you can be banned when you try to return.

As for all other Muslim religious practices: praying, reading the Quran, visiting Mecca, giving alms to the poor, etc, FD's got that covered too. FD, you see, has redefined Islam as a terrorist political movement. Therefore, all Islamic religious expression can be banned.

You make a mistake when you assume FD shares liberal views on religious or cultural expression, G. He doesn't. Whenever you can get a straight answer out of him, he expresses views that are the very antithesis of liberalism.

FD is not defending religious expression here, he's defending the expression of hate. FD wants the freedom to bludgeon people he doesn't like, and his criteria for them is anyone who challenges the Anglo-Saxon global hegemon led by Uncle, Mother and their agents - the Saudis and Israelis in the Middle East, for example, or their puppet regimes in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

For FD, the preservation of this order is so fundamental it goes without saying. Why would you even question it? FD was happy to uphold freedom of expression and pluralism and civility until someone came along who actually challenged his world view, someone so diabolical the very sight of his name made the blood rush to FD's head.

Do you know who that ex-member is, G?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 4:21pm
I blame Islam.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 4:21pm
But that's just moi.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:13pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:14pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 12:43pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:42pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 1:38pm:
So now people are going to flood to stay away from Rugby because Israel Folau said that sinners would burn in hell?


No, the sponsors are the ones they are worried about.

QANTAS is their main backer I believe, and they were said to be putting pressure on RA.



Joyce denies that.

And it's not "Qantas" ... it's Joyce.

Why should he be able to hide behind the company logo & assert influence on RA to deal with Folau?

Afterall Joyce is just an employee of the company.


No, dear, Joyce is appointed by the board.

And I believe this decision was discussed by the board.

But that's irrelevant. The team is the team. Why should sponsorship have anything to do with who they select to play? This was RA's decision.

Without Folou, apparently their best player ever, they should expect to lose sponsorship too. After all, Folou, as every schoolboy knows, is the reason they win.

A devil's choice, innit?


Better I take Zud Afrique in the Rugby championship first match then?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:17pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 8:17am:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?



Let me try to dumb it down for you. He was fired for breaching his code of conduct.


Why do the homofascists act like this? A simple yes or no will suffice John, if you are not too scared of being honest for once. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


Is that why you never answer questions FD? you're a chicken sh1t homo fascist?  ;D ;D ;D

I've answered your question, multiple times. If you don't like the answer that's your problem. Not mine.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:19pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:26pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:11pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?



Let me try to dumb it down for you. He was fired for breaching his code of conduct.
And the fact that Joyce threatened to pull QANTAS sponsorship.


that's been my argument all along homo.

I've asked you the question several times, but each time you ran away without answering. We'll try again. If you has a business, and an employee of yours posted something on social media that could cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars, would you take action against him?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:20pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 4:20pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


FD's not defending religious speech, G, he's defending hate speech.

Remember, when Yassmin Tweeted something as harmless as lest we forget refugees, FD defended the rape and death threats that followed - to the letter.

For FD, a tinted Muslim woman comparing the plight of refuges to Australians killed in foreign wars deserved everything she got, whether she was expressing her religious views or not.

Likewise, FD's not defending Folou's right to spruik the message of his prophet, he's defending Folou's right to slag off the hommers.

FD hasn't defended religious freedom since "he changed his mind" in 2007. FD is now of the opinion that those who follow the religion of Islam should be banned. FD wants them asked cunning questions on their visa applications - questions designed to trip them up, agree that they support genocide, want to kill gays who do it Mardi Gras-style and tough-titties, off with their treacherous heads.

In fact, why ask them at all? They have to believe this, they're Muslims. They don't share the same values as Whitey. The purpose of the visa questions is to get them to admit that they can't live among civilised people so you can knock them back, but still maintain you believe in freedom.

FD's always been rather quiet about what to do with the ones like you; citizens who convert. He hopes you'll sneak off to fight in some foreign war so you can be banned when you try to return.

As for all other Muslim religious practices: praying, reading the Quran, visiting Mecca, giving alms to the poor, etc, FD's got that covered too. FD, you see, has redefined Islam as a terrorist political movement. Therefore, all Islamic religious expression can be banned.

You make a mistake when you assume FD shares liberal views on religious or cultural expression, G. He doesn't. Whenever you can get a straight answer out of him, he expresses views that are the very antithesis of liberalism.

FD is not defending religious expression here, he's defending the expression of hate. FD wants the freedom to bludgeon people he doesn't like, and his criteria for them is anyone who challenges the Anglo-Saxon global hegemon led by Uncle, Mother and their agents - the Saudis and Israelis in the Middle East, for example, or their puppet regimes in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

For FD, the preservation of this order is so fundamental it goes without saying. Why would you even question it? FD was happy to uphold freedom of expression and pluralism and civility until someone came along who actually challenged his world view, someone so diabolical the very sight of his name made the blood rush to FD's head.

Do you know who that ex-member is, G?


It's only hate speech for the terminally offended SJW's and the hommers..... no?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:22pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


Did you ban JS for his views, FD?

Or for disagreeing with yours?



not this time ... but it's still early   ::)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:23pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:09pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:07pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Good work, Greggery. Now, would you like FD to answer a question?


That would be splendid.


you've more chance of winning lotto

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Well that's a surprise. I was expecting you to go with the meaningless obfuscation options rather than the blatant lie option. And it only took you a few pages to give a straight answer.

Is your reasoning that the technical appeal to the contract clause means he was not expressing his religious views?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:27pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:
You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others.



are you claiming RA didn't know of his religious beliefs?  :D :D :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:29pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:27pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:
You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others.



are you claiming RA didn't know of his religious beliefs?  :D :D :D


No. If you are still confused, you should be able to figure out what we are talking about by reading the rest of the post.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:30pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


Here's what you are missing Effendi.

Employer:  Are you a Muslim?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Employer:  No worries, I'll employ you.  Start Monday at $M4 over four years.  But.....Because of the high profile your employment by me gives you and an obvious connection with me because of that, you are required NOT to spruik your Mulsim views on social Media.  Do you agree?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Do ya see, FD?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:34pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:29pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:27pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:
You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others.



are you claiming RA didn't know of his religious beliefs?  :D :D :D


No. If you are still confused, you should be able to figure out what we are talking about by reading the rest of the post.


lets try it



Quote:
The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


nope, other than you pretending to interpret the law, that doesn't shed any more light on the subject.

You claimed he can't be fined for his religious beliefs unless he makes them known to others. If not the employer, then who are the 'others' you are talking about?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:56pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


Here's what you are missing Effendi.

Employer:  Are you a Muslim?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Employer:  No worries, I'll employ you.  Start Monday at $M4 over four years.  But.....Because of the high profile your employment by me gives you and an obvious connection with me because of that, you are required NOT to spruik your Mulsim views on social Media.  Do you agree?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Do ya see, FD?


Do you still think people can sign away their right not to be raped in an employment contract?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:58pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:
You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


You are being obtuse - again.

I did not say its a simple case that you can be fired for letting those beliefs be known to others. I even gave a specific example where you shouldn't - if his boss had asked for his opinion. However it is simply absurd to say that any old hate speech should be off limits - so long its under the cover of "religious freedom" - regardless of the medium and the circumstances in which its said. We know that won't fly under the law (try shouting in the middle of a busy street that its your sincere religious belief that all jews should be gassed) - so it obviously shouldn't be a protected condition of employment.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Mr Hammer on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:58pm

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


Here's what you are missing Effendi.

Employer:  Are you a Muslim?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Employer:  No worries, I'll employ you.  Start Monday at $M4 over four years.  But.....Because of the high profile your employment by me gives you and an obvious connection with me because of that, you are required NOT to spruik your Mulsim views on social Media.  Do you agree?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Do ya see, FD?

Are you kidding. The employer would be into trouble saying that. No workplace can demand that.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Jul 15th, 2019 at 6:08pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:58pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


Here's what you are missing Effendi.

Employer:  Are you a Muslim?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Employer:  No worries, I'll employ you.  Start Monday at $M4 over four years.  But.....Because of the high profile your employment by me gives you and an obvious connection with me because of that, you are required NOT to spruik your Mulsim views on social Media.  Do you agree?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Do ya see, FD?

Are you kidding. The employer would be into trouble saying that. No workplace can demand that.


It was not demanded.  It was a condition the potential employee could reject or accept with eyes wide open.

Effendi:


Quote:
Do you still think people can sign away their right not to be raped in an employment contract?


I have never said I think that Effendi.   :)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by cods on Jul 15th, 2019 at 6:30pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:56pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


Here's what you are missing Effendi.

Employer:  Are you a Muslim?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Employer:  No worries, I'll employ you.  Start Monday at $M4 over four years.  But.....Because of the high profile your employment by me gives you and an obvious connection with me because of that, you are required NOT to spruik your Mulsim views on social Media.  Do you agree?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Do ya see, FD?


Do you still think people can sign away their right not to be raped in an employment contract?




naughty fd.....

you do not give someone the right to rape you?...

that is something that is done TOO you...


where as YES

if you post your religious thoughts on social media  it is a conscious act  to do so

and if it is against a clause in a  contract you signed   then YES you have wilfully broken your contract.




Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:46pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:22pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


Did you ban JS for his views, FD?

Or for disagreeing with yours?



not this time ... but it's still early   ::)


We'll ask FD.

FD, will you rule out banning JS for being a hideous spineless jellyfish with his own views that may or may not differ to yours?

A simple yes or no will suffice.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:51pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:27pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:
You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others.



are you claiming RA didn't know of his religious beliefs?  :D :D :D


No, FD's saying he cannot be fired because he refuses to make his beliefs known to others.

Cunning, no?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:53pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:29pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:27pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:
You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others.



are you claiming RA didn't know of his religious beliefs?  :D :D :D


No. If you are still confused, you should be able to figure out what we are talking about by reading the rest of the post.


And when you're banned, don't bother asking.

You should be able to figure out what sound a jellyfish makes.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:56pm

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:58pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


Here's what you are missing Effendi.

Employer:  Are you a Muslim?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Employer:  No worries, I'll employ you.  Start Monday at $M4 over four years.  But.....Because of the high profile your employment by me gives you and an obvious connection with me because of that, you are required NOT to spruik your Mulsim views on social Media.  Do you agree?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Do ya see, FD?

Are you kidding. The employer would be into trouble saying that. No workplace can demand that.


I haven't had - or applied for - a job in the past 12 years that didn't have a code of conduct for social media, on or off the job.

You?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:58pm

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Well that's a surprise. I was expecting you to go with the meaningless obfuscation options rather than the blatant lie option. And it only took you a few pages to give a straight answer.

Is your reasoning that the technical appeal to the contract clause means he was not expressing his religious views?


My reasoning is that he wasn't fired for expressing his religious views.

Not really sure what part of that you don't understand.

If you believe he was, then simply provide a link to the statement from his employer saying that he was fired for expressing his religious views.

Over to you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 15th, 2019 at 10:23pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:46pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:22pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


Did you ban JS for his views, FD?

Or for disagreeing with yours?



not this time ... but it's still early   ::)


We'll ask FD.

FD, will you rule out banning JS for being a hideous spineless jellyfish with his own views that may or may not differ to yours?

A simple yes or no will suffice.


I'm afraid FDs position is a sinecure and is infra cure ..... he is not obliged to give his reasons for the short-term termination of someone with a long record of offence ...

"And this year's Academy Award for Lifetime Achievement in Sledging goes to.........."

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Raven on Jul 17th, 2019 at 11:28pm
If we are going to use religious beliefs as the "trump card" in the Folau saga, an argument could be made that RA has a higher authority on their side.

Romans 13:1-3:

Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God. 2 So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. 3 For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:45am

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:56pm:

Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:58pm:

Aussie wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 2:18pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 6:41pm:
The law forbids firing people for their religious views.


Which is subtly, but crucially different to firing for a) expressing those views and b) the medium in which they are expressed. If Folau's boss had asked him about what he thought about gays and Folau answered that he believed they were going to hell - then that is obviously very different to an unprompted broadcasting of that view on a platform viewed by millions.

You talk about a slippery slope, well how more slippery can you get when you make the broadcasting of any kind of hate speech - up to and including incitement of violence - a completely protected activity under the law - so long as it is done under the cover of "religious beliefs"?

So I think you are wrong - I don't believe the broadcasting of any sort of speech under the cover of "religious beliefs" has to be completely off limits to employers in their conditions of employment. The law will understand the nuance between holding a religious belief on the one hand, and how they go about broadcasting those beliefs on the other. Obviously no one would argue if a muslim was sacked by RA for posting "it is my sincere Islamic belief that all jews should be rounded up and gassed forthwith" to his millions of followers - nor would there be any argument when he is arrested for the same thing.


You cannot fire someone for their religious belief unless they make those beliefs known the others. The law would be meaningless if interpreted your way.


Here's what you are missing Effendi.

Employer:  Are you a Muslim?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Employer:  No worries, I'll employ you.  Start Monday at $M4 over four years.  But.....Because of the high profile your employment by me gives you and an obvious connection with me because of that, you are required NOT to spruik your Mulsim views on social Media.  Do you agree?

Potential Employee:  Yes.

Do ya see, FD?

Are you kidding. The employer would be into trouble saying that. No workplace can demand that.


I haven't had - or applied for - a job in the past 12 years that didn't have a code of conduct for social media, on or off the job.

You?



So the real question is where should these conditions start and finish?  Second question is how should this kind of oversight of an employee's personal life be regulated and codified so as to prevent abuse?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:51am

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:58pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Well that's a surprise. I was expecting you to go with the meaningless obfuscation options rather than the blatant lie option. And it only took you a few pages to give a straight answer.

Is your reasoning that the technical appeal to the contract clause means he was not expressing his religious views?


My reasoning is that he wasn't fired for expressing his religious views.

Not really sure what part of that you don't understand.

If you believe he was, then simply provide a link to the statement from his employer saying that he was fired for expressing his religious views.

Over to you.


That's like saying 'applications will be encouraged from Nepalese citizens' - meaning in reality you will only consider applications from Nepalese citizens...

Nah, nah - we didn't sack Israel for expressing his religious views.. we sacked him for expressing them and we are using a vague contract and verbal chicanery as an excuse..... we believe, in our all-inclusive manner, that there is room for all religious belief systems...and in the freedom to express them in your own time.... as long as you don;t express them in contravention of our vague contract.

So, greg... what part of religious beliefs do you find hard to follow?  Or are you saying that expression of personal religious views is an absolute right, but we can contract to abrogate that right by ordering you not to do so?

The reality is he's been sacked because the poofs are upset... big deal - tell 'em to swallow some cement... give 'em 50c and point them to a public phone....

Should be fun watching this case come out...

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 18th, 2019 at 12:42pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 10:23pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:46pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:22pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 10:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


Did you ban JS for his views, FD?

Or for disagreeing with yours?



not this time ... but it's still early   ::)


We'll ask FD.

FD, will you rule out banning JS for being a hideous spineless jellyfish with his own views that may or may not differ to yours?

A simple yes or no will suffice.


I'm afraid FDs position is a sinecure and is infra cure ..... he is not obliged to give his reasons for the short-term termination of someone with a long record of offence ...

"And this year's Academy Award for Lifetime Achievement in Sledging goes to.........."


We're not talking about obligations, dear. We're talking about Freeeedom.

Besides, it would be polite to tell JS why he received a 6 month ban.

It's not an obligation, it's a courtesy.

You?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 18th, 2019 at 4:00pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 12:42pm:
We're not talking about obligations, dear. We're talking about Freeeedom.

Besides, it would be polite to tell JS why he received a 6 12 month ban.

It's not an obligation, it's a courtesy.

You?


fixed it for you K ;)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by cods on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 4:00pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 12:42pm:
We're not talking about obligations, dear. We're talking about Freeeedom.

Besides, it would be polite to tell JS why he received a 6 12 month ban.

It's not an obligation, it's a courtesy.

You?


fixed it for you K ;)




not something to brag about I wouldnt think?.... ::)

js has no more freedom than folau  or you karnel for that matter....

I would bet even you have rules when someone comes into your house....and if they started breaking the place up you would quickly ask them to leave....

I know I would 

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:00pm

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm:
not something to brag about I wouldnt think?.... Roll Eyes



how is it bragging? Merely correcting the record.


cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm:
js has no more freedom than folau  or you karnel for that matter....


you are wrong. I am free to do and say whatever I like. Of course, I also haven't got a $4m contract restricting me. :D :D


cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm:
I would bet even you have rules when someone comes into your house....and if they started breaking the place up you would quickly ask them to leave....



of course. But I'm not the one crying about folaus freedom of speech being impeded. I think you should direct your comment to FD.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by cods on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:08pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:00pm:

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm:
not something to brag about I wouldnt think?.... Roll Eyes



how is it bragging? Merely correcting the record.


cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm:
js has no more freedom than folau  or you karnel for that matter....


you are wrong. I am free to do and say whatever I like. Of course, I also haven't got a $4m contract restricting me. :D :D


cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm:
I would bet even you have rules when someone comes into your house....and if they started breaking the place up you would quickly ask them to leave....



of course. But I'm not the one crying about folaus freedom of speech being impeded. I think you should direct your comment to FD.



making sure everyone knows it was a 12 month ban   and not 6 is not being shy!


is that why you were banned for 12 months?...


I am not crying about folau either.. in fact I believe he was wrong and deserved to be sacked...

to my mind a contract is a contract

dont sign it if you dont agree with it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:15pm

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:08pm:
making sure everyone knows it was a 12 month ban   and not 6 is not being shy!


is that why you were banned for 12 months?...


i think everyone should know what a duplicitous coward FD is. Don't you? And he refuses to say why. If you checked my comments prior to the ban there was nothing extraordinary there to warrant a 12 month ban. The only logical conclusion is that he lost the plot, or doesn't like people who disagree with him. Given that both Mothra and I got our ban at the same time, for the same period, the last reason is the only one to make sense.


cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:08pm:
to my mind a contract is a contract

dont sign it if you dont agree with it.


i agree.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by cods on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:23pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:15pm:

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:08pm:
making sure everyone knows it was a 12 month ban   and not 6 is not being shy!


is that why you were banned for 12 months?...


i think everyone should know what a duplicitous coward FD is. Don't you? And he refuses to say why. If you checked my comments prior to the ban there was nothing extraordinary there to warrant a 12 month ban. The only logical conclusion is that he lost the plot, or doesn't like people who disagree with him. Given that both Mothra and I got our ban at the same time, for the same period, the last reason is the only one to make sense.


when you decide to have your very own forum  I am sure you will understand
you answer to no one...

its your forum and you pay the bill... in the mean time there is no obligation for any member to post...

you dont like the rules  so be it..

fd doesnt answer your questions its not as if he does for some and not others.

its his choice its his forum....

perhaps you get better service at monks?....

so therein lies your choice...

fd is being fd    he isnt being duplicitous at all...



cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:08pm:
to my mind a contract is a contract

dont sign it if you dont agree with it.


i agree.


so we have no argument regarding folaus  freedom of speech....its good to know!

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:32pm

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:23pm:
when you decide to have your very own forum  I am sure you will understand
you answer to no one...


it's not about answering to anyone. How do I, or anyone else, know what got his panties all knotted up the last time, and what to avoid doing in the future, if he doesn't tell me what it was? I used to moderate an immigration forum years ago and I ALWAYS told people why they were banned. Not that I banned many.



cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:23pm:
so we have no argument regarding folaus  freedom of speech....its good to know!



never did. You spoke out against FD's faux victimology from the beginning. Good on you for it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Jul 19th, 2019 at 12:46am
JS  got a six month ban?  Now THAT is what is wrong with our judicial and sentencing system......


8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 19th, 2019 at 8:02am

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:15pm:

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:08pm:
making sure everyone knows it was a 12 month ban   and not 6 is not being shy!


is that why you were banned for 12 months?...


i think everyone should know what a duplicitous coward FD is. Don't you? And he refuses to say why. If you checked my comments prior to the ban there was nothing extraordinary there to warrant a 12 month ban. The only logical conclusion is that he lost the plot, or doesn't like people who disagree with him. Given that both Mothra and I got our ban at the same time, for the same period, the last reason is the only one to make sense.


cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:08pm:
to my mind a contract is a contract

dont sign it if you dont agree with it.


i agree.


Then we're agreed.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 19th, 2019 at 4:58pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 19th, 2019 at 12:46am:
JS  got a six month ban?  Now THAT is what is wrong with our judicial and sentencing system......


8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)  8-)


it was 12 months. ::)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:22pm

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 9:56pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 4:00pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 12:42pm:
We're not talking about obligations, dear. We're talking about Freeeedom.

Besides, it would be polite to tell JS why he received a 6 12 month ban.

It's not an obligation, it's a courtesy.

You?


fixed it for you K ;)




not something to brag about I wouldnt think?.... ::)

js has no more freedom than folau  or you karnel for that matter....

I would bet even you have rules when someone comes into your house....and if they started breaking the place up you would quickly ask them to leave....

I know I would 


I agree, dear. A 12 month ban for not saying what sound a jellyfish makes seems fair to me.

Naughty naughty, JS. I trust you've learned to answer FD's questions in a timely manner.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:27pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:32pm:

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:23pm:
when you decide to have your very own forum  I am sure you will understand
you answer to no one...


it's not about answering to anyone.


Yes, but Cods does have a point, JS. FD never answers anyone.

Freeeeedom of speech, innit.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:29pm

Karnal wrote on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:27pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:32pm:

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:23pm:
when you decide to have your very own forum  I am sure you will understand
you answer to no one...


it's not about answering to anyone.


Yes, but Cods does have a point, JS. FD never answers anyone.

Freeeeedom of speech, innit.


he never did say what sound a jellyfish makes :D

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:32pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:29pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:27pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:32pm:

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:23pm:
when you decide to have your very own forum  I am sure you will understand
you answer to no one...


it's not about answering to anyone.


Yes, but Cods does have a point, JS. FD never answers anyone.

Freeeeedom of speech, innit.


he never did say what sound a jellyfish makes :D


Ah.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 2:06pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 9:58pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 5:25pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jul 15th, 2019 at 11:35am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 9:09pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 14th, 2019 at 8:44pm:
Does that mean he was not fired for his religious views John? In other words, are you telling a lie, or just giving us meaningless obfuscation?


He was fired for breaching his code of conduct FD.

Do you need me to repeat it for you again?


Let me try to dumb it down for you. Was Folau fired for expressing his religious views?


No.


Well that's a surprise. I was expecting you to go with the meaningless obfuscation options rather than the blatant lie option. And it only took you a few pages to give a straight answer.

Is your reasoning that the technical appeal to the contract clause means he was not expressing his religious views?


My reasoning is that he wasn't fired for expressing his religious views.

Not really sure what part of that you don't understand.

If you believe he was, then simply provide a link to the statement from his employer saying that he was fired for expressing his religious views.

Over to you.


What you don't understand is that he was expressing his religion views.

Are you using the fact that the employer did not openly admit to firing him illegally as evidence? Are you really that naive?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 3:18pm
Do religious views have to include hate speech, FD?

Do you campaign against the Muselman because of your religious views?

That's a question.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 3:19pm

John Smith wrote on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:29pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 19th, 2019 at 6:27pm:

John Smith wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:32pm:

cods wrote on Jul 18th, 2019 at 10:23pm:
when you decide to have your very own forum  I am sure you will understand
you answer to no one...


it's not about answering to anyone.


Yes, but Cods does have a point, JS. FD never answers anyone.

Freeeeedom of speech, innit.


he never did say what sound a jellyfish makes :D


Oh, I think he'll make it any second now, JS.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:17pm

Karnal wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 3:18pm:
Do religious views have to include hate speech, FD?


Or indeed incitement to violence. FD never did manage to get a coherent explanation for the theoretical 'religious belief' that all jews should be gassed in ovens - only a lame 'well I doubt such a religious belief would exist' type response.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:25pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:17pm:

Karnal wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 3:18pm:
Do religious views have to include hate speech, FD?


Or indeed incitement to violence. FD never did manage to get a coherent explanation for the theoretical 'religious belief' that all jews should be gassed in ovens - only a lame 'well I doubt such a religious belief would exist' type response.


How about the 'theoretical' religious belief that they really were a literal mindless collective of treacherous Jews without individual personality? Or that even the rocks are going to assist people in slaughtering Jews?

Religions don't have to include hate speech, but one of them throws it in for free.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:57pm
You are so obsessed with making this about me and my personal beliefs FD, you totally forgot to address the actual point. Again.

For the record, if a muslim worked for an organisation that expressely strove to make their public image one of standing up against anti-semitism - then I reckon it would be perfectly fine and proper for them to sack him if he repeatedly went on social media to say that jews are a mindless collective with no individual personality. Especially so if they had gone to the trouble of warning him the first time he did it that he would be sacked if he continued doing it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:01pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:57pm:
You are so obsessed with making this about me and my personal beliefs FD, you totally forgot to address the actual point. Again.

For the record, if a muslim worked for an organisation that expressely strove to make their public image one of standing up against anti-semitism - then I reckon it would be perfectly fine and proper for them to sack him if he repeatedly went on social media to say that jews are a mindless collective with no individual personality. Especially so if they had gone to the trouble of warning him the first time he did it that he would be sacked if he continued doing it.


Thanks for bringing that up Gandalf.

What about a Muslim who was employed to mop the floors in a motel. Do you think it would be OK to fire such a Muslim who posted online about mindless collectives of treacherous Jews?

Or do Muslims not do that sort of work in the first place?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:23pm
You are starting to go into raving mode FD.

The pre-conditions I set out are eminently clear and self-explanatory. Snide little digs at muslims disguised as legitimate inquiry don't conceal your ducking and weaving of the actual point here.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:30pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:57pm:
You are so obsessed with making this about me and my personal beliefs FD, you totally forgot to address the actual point. Again.

For the record, if a muslim worked for an organisation that expressely strove to make their public image one of standing up against anti-semitism - then I reckon it would be perfectly fine and proper for them to sack him if he repeatedly went on social media to say that jews are a mindless collective with no individual personality. Especially so if they had gone to the trouble of warning him the first time he did it that he would be sacked if he continued doing it.


Would followers of Islam be pretty much unemployable if all employers made it part of their code of conduct that people who wanted Jews pushed into the sea would not be hired?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:39pm

Setanta wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:30pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:57pm:
You are so obsessed with making this about me and my personal beliefs FD, you totally forgot to address the actual point. Again.

For the record, if a muslim worked for an organisation that expressely strove to make their public image one of standing up against anti-semitism - then I reckon it would be perfectly fine and proper for them to sack him if he repeatedly went on social media to say that jews are a mindless collective with no individual personality. Especially so if they had gone to the trouble of warning him the first time he did it that he would be sacked if he continued doing it.


Would followers of Islam be pretty much unemployable if all employers made it part of their code of conduct that people who wanted Jews pushed into the sea would not be hired?


No Setanta, and such snarkiness is unbecoming of you. Best leave the snide Islamophobic digs to FD and co.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:50pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:39pm:

Setanta wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:30pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:57pm:
You are so obsessed with making this about me and my personal beliefs FD, you totally forgot to address the actual point. Again.

For the record, if a muslim worked for an organisation that expressely strove to make their public image one of standing up against anti-semitism - then I reckon it would be perfectly fine and proper for them to sack him if he repeatedly went on social media to say that jews are a mindless collective with no individual personality. Especially so if they had gone to the trouble of warning him the first time he did it that he would be sacked if he continued doing it.


Would followers of Islam be pretty much unemployable if all employers made it part of their code of conduct that people who wanted Jews pushed into the sea would not be hired?


No Setanta, and such snarkiness is unbecoming of you. Best leave the snide digs at muslims to FD and co.


It's not snarky. Moslems generally seek to see Israel returned to Islam. I've said I don't agree with legal religious discrimination. If my job does not interfere with what they teach I should be able to be employed by them. Computers are not religious hence I should be able to work in a religious school. I personally have no problem with people of other faiths working in schools as long as they accept the teaching of the school.

Religious people don't tend to share my point of view and that is why I'm asking you, should Muslims(or anyone) be banned employment because they don't hold the views of their employers. We do know Islam sees Israel as occupied territory and seeks it's annulment. Is it OK to deny people employment if they hold that belief. We have Jewish own big companies, should they be able to deny employment to people who seek their destruction? If employers took that position, would Moslems be unemployable?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:00am

Setanta wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:50pm:
It's not snarky.


Bullshit. You literally implied that all muslims want to wipe out the jewish race.

Its about as offensive as you can get. On a par with FD's "all muslims support genocide" (direct quote by the way).


Setanta wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:50pm:
Religious people don't tend to share my point of view and that is why I'm asking you


Try asking me in a less bigoted and offensive way if you expect a serious response.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:05am

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:00am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:50pm:
It's not snarky.


Bullshit. You literally implied that all muslims want to wipe out the jewish race.

Its about as offensive as you can get. On a par with FD's "all muslims support genocide" (direct quote by the way).


Setanta wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:50pm:
Religious people don't tend to share my point of view and that is why I'm asking you


Try asking me in a less bigoted and offensive way if you expect a serious response.


Perhaps you could answer it as if I didn't do what you claim, give it a go. What is the second most holy site to Islam and where is it? Are you saying Islam does not want to have control of it and the lands it conquered and claimed?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:27am

Quote:
Are you saying Islam does not want to have control of it and the lands it conquered and claimed?


Thats exactly what I'm saying. The vast majority of muslims don't give a flying faark who controls the Al Aqsa Mosque sentanta - and only slightly fewer wouldn't even know what it is. You are just stereotyping muslims as some mindless collective who only ever think about such obscure political issues that have precisely zero relevance to almost every muslim's actual day to day life.


Setanta wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:50pm:
e do know Islam sees Israel as occupied territory and seeks it's annulment. Is it OK to deny people employment if they hold that belief. We have Jewish own big companies, should they be able to deny employment to people who seek their destruction? If employers took that position, would Moslems be unemployable?


Obviously the premise of your question is absurd and offensive - as I've mentioned already. But as to the general principle, if a company really did employ someone who was actively trying to undermine and even destroy it - it should go without saying they should be able to sack them. And call the police while their at it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:43am
If what you say is true, the second most holy place to Islam is not cared about and little known, is it only religious/political leaders that care? Do people even listen to them? I've watched docos showing both sides and I'm not convinced by either not having a dog in the fight. Why do you think they don't care when it is a part of their religion? Is not having it in the hands of their enemies/unbelievers a blasphemy? Do they care about the black stone? Are unbelievers allowed to get anywhere near it? Is the Haj still a thing or do most not give a shyte?

I'm not religious, I don't understand how you people think. If you want me to have any idea of what you are on about I can only look at what you say and do and generally it's not that good. And I suppose as questions you see as stupid. Such is the life of the unbeliever.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against that all-time mindless collective the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:05am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Perhaps they don't consider themselves as you consider them?

In any event, you don't want it explained to you. No explanation would suffice. You simply want to sit in judgement.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:07am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Oh, I think you like some religions more that others, Setanta.

Why do some people choose to be tinted?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:09am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:43am:
If what you say is true, the second most holy place to Islam is not cared about and little known, is it only religious/political leaders that care? Do people even listen to them?


Tell me Set, do you reckon an impoverished housemaid in Indonesia spends all her days fretting over the status of the Al Aqsa Mosque? I've been to Friday mosque sermons for the best part of 15 years now, and I must say I can't recall a single instance in which the status of the mosque has been mentioned. Not once.

But even if you were right, and we really are obsessing over how to get Al Aqsa back under the control of Islam - why does this necessarily equate to wanting genocide of the jews?


Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:43am:
If you want me to have any idea of what you are on about I can only look at what you say and do and generally it's not that good.


You demonstrably have no idea what actual muslims say and do.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:11am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:05am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Perhaps they don't consider themselves as you consider them?

In any event, you don't want it explained to you. No explanation would suffice. You simply want to sit in judgement.


It seems you are doing that yourself without any help from me.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:16am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:11am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:05am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Perhaps they don't consider themselves as you consider them?

In any event, you don't want it explained to you. No explanation would suffice. You simply want to sit in judgement.


It seems you are doing that yourself without any help from me.


I'm not the one claiming all Muslims think anything at all .. or that all religious people are slaves.

That would be all you. In judgement.

Me calling you on it is a far lesser example of what you yourself are doing. I'm calling you, an individual, on your words. And with the benefit of having tried previously to have similar conversations with you.

You are intractable. You always have been.

You were once civil and respectful though. You're no longer even that.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:17am

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:07am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Oh, I think you like some religions more that others, Setanta.

Why do some people choose to be tinted?


You might have a point there K. Some religions do seem better than others. Better yet philosophies that are treated like religions. Damned Buddhists.

Are you telling me all religions are equal? Like all cultures are equal? That the benefits of these cultures and religions are something that should be shared worldwide?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:18am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:16am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:11am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:05am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Perhaps they don't consider themselves as you consider them?

In any event, you don't want it explained to you. No explanation would suffice. You simply want to sit in judgement.


It seems you are doing that yourself without any help from me.


I'm not the one claiming all Muslims think anything at all .. or that all religious people are slaves.

That would be all you. In judgement.

Me calling you on it is a far lesser example of what you yourself are doing. I'm calling you, an individual, on your words. And with the benefit of having tried previously to have similar conversations with you.

You are intractable. You always have been.

You were once civil and respectful though. You're no longer even that.


That's racist, apparently. They are not incapable of thought.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are. I would have thought Mothra would understand this considering her line of work.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:23am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:18am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:16am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:11am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:05am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Perhaps they don't consider themselves as you consider them?

In any event, you don't want it explained to you. No explanation would suffice. You simply want to sit in judgement.


It seems you are doing that yourself without any help from me.


I'm not the one claiming all Muslims think anything at all .. or that all religious people are slaves.

That would be all you. In judgement.

Me calling you on it is a far lesser example of what you yourself are doing. I'm calling you, an individual, on your words. And with the benefit of having tried previously to have similar conversations with you.

You are intractable. You always have been.

You were once civil and respectful though. You're no longer even that.


That's racist, apparently. They are not incapable of thought.


Just childish. Save it for the members it works on. Our conversation will be very short if you keep this crap up.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:26am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.


You have writ large your pissed offedness but not addressed anything but that. That's not a win. Explain yourself.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:31am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:26am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.


You have writ large your pissed offedness but not addressed anything but that. That's not a win. Explain yourself.



Pissed offedness is nowhere near what i'm feeling. And you raisded the ante ... suggesting that all Muslims felt any way at all, least of all what you ascribed them.

Then the claim that all religious people are slaves.

Can you seriously suggest a more productive way of dealing with such commentary that dismissing it and criticising it's source?

As i said, there is no point debating this with you. I tried many times before you became hostile in general. I got nowhere. You don;t want to change your mind. You just want to insult. God knows you get enough praise for doing it on here.

It's not going to work on me.

You have been corrected. I fail to see what more needs to be said to you.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:41am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:31am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:26am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.


You have writ large your pissed offedness but not addressed anything but that. That's not a win. Explain yourself.



Pissed offedness is nowhere near what i'm feeling. And you raisded the ante ... suggesting that all Muslims felt any way at all, least of all what you ascribed them.

Then the claim that all religious people are slaves.

Can you seriously suggest a more productive way of dealing with such commentary that dismissing it and criticising it's source?

As i said, there is no point debating this with you. I tried many times before you became hostile in general. I got nowhere. You don;t want to change your mind. You just want to insult. God knows you get enough praise for doing it on here.

It's not going to work on me.

You have been corrected. I fail to see what more needs to be said to you.


All religious people are slaves. Slaves to their doctrine and beliefs. How can you deny that? I've always be somewhat hostile to religion. Like forever. It's not a new thing at all. I haven't insulted anyone unless insulting religion is insulting and I've always done that.

Seems the one that hates catholicism and endured it's travails has a hard on for other faiths now. Why do you think they deserve any more respect?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:51am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:41am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:31am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:26am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.


You have writ large your pissed offedness but not addressed anything but that. That's not a win. Explain yourself.



Pissed offedness is nowhere near what i'm feeling. And you raisded the ante ... suggesting that all Muslims felt any way at all, least of all what you ascribed them.

Then the claim that all religious people are slaves.

Can you seriously suggest a more productive way of dealing with such commentary that dismissing it and criticising it's source?

As i said, there is no point debating this with you. I tried many times before you became hostile in general. I got nowhere. You don;t want to change your mind. You just want to insult. God knows you get enough praise for doing it on here.

It's not going to work on me.

You have been corrected. I fail to see what more needs to be said to you.


All religious people are slaves. Slaves to their doctrine and beliefs. How can you deny that? I've always be somewhat hostile to religion. Like forever. It's not a new thing at all. I haven't insulted anyone unless insulting religion is insulting and I've always done that.

Seems the one that hates catholicism and endured it's travails has a hard on for other faiths now. Why do you think they deserve any more respect?




Some of the finest people i know are Catholics. And some of the qualities i like most about me are inspired by my religious upbringing.

Your point?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:59am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:51am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:41am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:31am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:26am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.


You have writ large your pissed offedness but not addressed anything but that. That's not a win. Explain yourself.



Pissed offedness is nowhere near what i'm feeling. And you raisded the ante ... suggesting that all Muslims felt any way at all, least of all what you ascribed them.

Then the claim that all religious people are slaves.

Can you seriously suggest a more productive way of dealing with such commentary that dismissing it and criticising it's source?

As i said, there is no point debating this with you. I tried many times before you became hostile in general. I got nowhere. You don;t want to change your mind. You just want to insult. God knows you get enough praise for doing it on here.

It's not going to work on me.

You have been corrected. I fail to see what more needs to be said to you.


All religious people are slaves. Slaves to their doctrine and beliefs. How can you deny that? I've always be somewhat hostile to religion. Like forever. It's not a new thing at all. I haven't insulted anyone unless insulting religion is insulting and I've always done that.

Seems the one that hates catholicism and endured it's travails has a hard on for other faiths now. Why do you think they deserve any more respect?




Some of the finest people i know are Catholics. And some of the qualities i like most about me are inspired by my religious upbringing.

Your point?


Living proof that it depends on how you handle yourself.... living by basic Christian, Buddhist, or Muslim or any other beliefs is just a clear indication of your socialisation - for every one like you - there are one or more who do not follow the same ideas...

Most people just want to get on and be decent - but there are always a few who want to be violent and vicious....

Now show us how to see the difference....... the problem has always been, and always will be, with a minority with some grievance, real or imagined, who will use that as the justification for insane actions.

How do YOU pick the difference?  I'm curious....

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:01am

Ye Grappler wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:59am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:51am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:41am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:31am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:26am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.


You have writ large your pissed offedness but not addressed anything but that. That's not a win. Explain yourself.



Pissed offedness is nowhere near what i'm feeling. And you raisded the ante ... suggesting that all Muslims felt any way at all, least of all what you ascribed them.

Then the claim that all religious people are slaves.

Can you seriously suggest a more productive way of dealing with such commentary that dismissing it and criticising it's source?

As i said, there is no point debating this with you. I tried many times before you became hostile in general. I got nowhere. You don;t want to change your mind. You just want to insult. God knows you get enough praise for doing it on here.

It's not going to work on me.

You have been corrected. I fail to see what more needs to be said to you.


All religious people are slaves. Slaves to their doctrine and beliefs. How can you deny that? I've always be somewhat hostile to religion. Like forever. It's not a new thing at all. I haven't insulted anyone unless insulting religion is insulting and I've always done that.

Seems the one that hates catholicism and endured it's travails has a hard on for other faiths now. Why do you think they deserve any more respect?




Some of the finest people i know are Catholics. And some of the qualities i like most about me are inspired by my religious upbringing.

Your point?


Living proof that it depends on how you handle yourself.... living by basic Christian, Buddhist, or Muslim or any other beliefs is just a clear indication of your socialisation - for every one like you - there are one or more who do not follow the same ideas...

Most people just want to get on and be decent - but there are always a few who want to be violent and vicious....

Now show us how to see the difference....... the problem has always been, and always will be, with a minority with some grievance, real or imagined, who will use that as the justification for insane actions.

How do YOU pick the difference?  I'm curious....


That is a characteristic of all humans, regardless of race, gender or creed.

Identifying certain groups under suspicion of this and not applying it generally is both foolish and bigoted.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:09am
I understand you are here to support the most feminist of religions Mothra. You go girl and reap what you sow.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:20am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:09am:
I understand you are here to support the most feminist of religions Mothra. You go girl and reap what you sow.



You know that Yassmin qualified that comment by saying clearly "for her" Why be so dishonest?

She is certainly entitled to believe that Islam resonates most deeply with her own feminist beliefs.

She has certainly never diminished or belittled the crimes against humanity so common in totalitarian regimes.

Some people just seem to want there to be as much antagonism as possible. You appear to be one of them.

Here's the thing, your way isn't the solution to the plights of those repressed and oppressed women. Neither do i think you really care about them aside from using them as a political football ... as do so many others on here.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:29am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:01am:

Ye Grappler wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:59am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:51am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:41am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:31am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:26am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:24am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:22am:
You know, you lot could drop your antagonism and try to make a case rather than doing what you are, no-one is going to discuss with you lashing out like you are.



Irony writ large.


You have writ large your pissed offedness but not addressed anything but that. That's not a win. Explain yourself.



Pissed offedness is nowhere near what i'm feeling. And you raisded the ante ... suggesting that all Muslims felt any way at all, least of all what you ascribed them.

Then the claim that all religious people are slaves.

Can you seriously suggest a more productive way of dealing with such commentary that dismissing it and criticising it's source?

As i said, there is no point debating this with you. I tried many times before you became hostile in general. I got nowhere. You don;t want to change your mind. You just want to insult. God knows you get enough praise for doing it on here.

It's not going to work on me.

You have been corrected. I fail to see what more needs to be said to you.


All religious people are slaves. Slaves to their doctrine and beliefs. How can you deny that? I've always be somewhat hostile to religion. Like forever. It's not a new thing at all. I haven't insulted anyone unless insulting religion is insulting and I've always done that.

Seems the one that hates catholicism and endured it's travails has a hard on for other faiths now. Why do you think they deserve any more respect?




Some of the finest people i know are Catholics. And some of the qualities i like most about me are inspired by my religious upbringing.

Your point?


Living proof that it depends on how you handle yourself.... living by basic Christian, Buddhist, or Muslim or any other beliefs is just a clear indication of your socialisation - for every one like you - there are one or more who do not follow the same ideas...

Most people just want to get on and be decent - but there are always a few who want to be violent and vicious....

Now show us how to see the difference....... the problem has always been, and always will be, with a minority with some grievance, real or imagined, who will use that as the justification for insane actions.

How do YOU pick the difference?  I'm curious....


That is a characteristic of all humans, regardless of race, gender or creed.

Identifying certain groups under suspicion of this and not applying it generally is both foolish and bigoted.


So.... ahhh.. who identifies certain groups under suspicion?

So operating on a probable cause in order to prevent a wrong is not a valid approach?  You would prefer that rather than a single Muslim terrorist be hung, a thousand potentials pass the gates without check?

It only takes one to kill a crowd.... so if comparing, for example, Buddhists as a group, you feel they should receive equal scrutiny in order to prevent wrong?

The statistical probability is that a Muslim has a greater chance of committing a grievous offence...... so you feel that probability should be overlooked in the interest of 'equal treatment'?

Let's try a parallel - if immigrants from an AIDS-ridden country seek to arrive here, should they be given the exact same scrutiny as all others?  Should prospective immigrants from a country torn by civil war for decades and generations be given the exact same scrutiny as a prospective immigrant from nation that has known peace for generations?  Should prospective immigrants steeped in a religion of conquest, paranoia, and violence be treated the same as a prospective immigrant from a nation at peace for generations and with no history of supremacism and domination by death and violence?

I'm curious.... how do YOU define 'equal treatment'?  Is equal treatment not based on reasoned evaluation of all factors, with each individual factor given equal weight?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:35am

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:17am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:07am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Oh, I think you like some religions more that others, Setanta.

Why do some people choose to be tinted?


You might have a point there K. Some religions do seem better than others. Better yet philosophies that are treated like religions. Damned Buddhists.

Are you telling me all religions are equal? Like all cultures are equal? That the benefits of these cultures and religions are something that should be shared worldwide?


In answer to your first two questions, I most certainly am not. In answer to your third question, I absolutely am.

Religions are not equal, just as medications are not equal. You use them for their specific benefits and say ah.

The Vedas describe 4 categories of spiritual practice:

1. Karma yoga. Karma means action. This is where you work selflessly, thinking of no outcome or benefit to yourself, your work becoming your spiritual practice. Mother Theresa was such a yogi. Gandhi was a more formalised practitioner.

2. Bhakti yoga. Bhakti means devotion. This is the yoga of faith, where you worship an object of attraction. Prayer, fasting, faith. Christians, Muslims and Hindus are Bhakti yogis.

3. Jnana yoga. Knowledge or self realisation. Here the yogi questions the premise of their ontology. Who am I? Where am I? What is thinking? The Buddha was a great Jnana yogi.

4. Raja yoga. The "king" or "royal" yoga, also known as ashtunga, the "eight limbed" path outlined in the Patanjali Sutras. This is a systematised path which ends in samadhi, or peace. It has elements of the above yogas and more.

The Buddha's "noble eightfold path" is believed by some to have influenced Patanjali's sutras (or narrative threads) in the form of a system. These yogic practices had existed centuries or millennia prior to their 250 BC discovery on bamboo-leaf parchment, but they were written here in a deeply resonant Sanskrit form that put the practices into context.

My teacher says that when you are working and doing, you are a karma yogi. When you are loving, you are a Bhakti yogi, and so on.

The first three yogas above are really the foundation of Raja yoga, and there are many other yogas aside from these.

The benefits of the cultures and religions most certainly should be shared with all who need them in the world. Some will naturally be drawn to certain ones. I'm not much of a devotional type. I simply don't get Christianity, Islam or Hinduism, although these religions do include yoga practices that are not just Bhakti.

I'm more drawn to Raja yoga and Buddhist practices, primarily to still my mind, feelings and expectations.

All cultures and religions are not the same, but we need to be curious about them all to understand our friends who use them.

It's worth saying that the cultures and religions also have their dark tendencies that need to be avoided. The method itself is not the aim. Nothing is fundamental beyond love, curiousity and awareness. Anything that teaches hate or intolerance or closed-minded absolutes is to be avoided at all costs.

This is different to warnings of consequences for failure. There are indeed some very hard fates in the universe, many on our own planet. Hanging out with dogs does give you fleas, throwing pearls before swine is indeed a waste, letting people or bad habits into your tent that will bring you down certainly does require you to kill them wherever you find them.

The same goes for cultures or religions that might seduce you into a state of mindless determination. Hatred is used for this, channelling all your energies towards a target of destruction.

Many see the tinted races as such a target. Others see the non-religious - or the religious. Whatever the target, letting hate into your tent will surely destroy you.

All cultures and religions serve a purpose. All can be a friend - or an enemy.

You?



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:45am
If the rope is too tight, he will not drop.. if it is too loose, it will not hang the bastard...   8-)  8-)  8-)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:51am

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 2:35am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:17am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:07am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Oh, I think you like some religions more that others, Setanta.

Why do some people choose to be tinted?


You might have a point there K. Some religions do seem better than others. Better yet philosophies that are treated like religions. Damned Buddhists.

Are you telling me all religions are equal? Like all cultures are equal? That the benefits of these cultures and religions are something that should be shared worldwide?


In answer to your first two questions, I most certainly am not. In answer to your third question, I absolutely am.

Religions are not equal, just as medications are not equal. You use them for their specific benefits and say ah.

The Vedas describe 4 categories of spiritual practice:

1. Karma yoga. Karma means action. This is where you work selflessly, thinking of no outcome or benefit to yourself, your work becoming your spiritual practice. Mother Theresa was such a yogi. Gandhi was a more formalised practitioner.

2. Bhakti yoga. Bhakti means devotion. This is the yoga of faith, where you worship an object of attraction. Prayer, fasting, faith. Christians, Muslims and Hindus are Bhakti yogis.

3. Jnana yoga. Knowledge or self realisation. Here the yogi questions the premise of their ontology. Who am I? Where am I? What is thinking? The Buddha was a great Jnana yogi.

4. Raja yoga. The "king" or "royal" yoga, also known as ashtunga, the "eight limbed" path outlined in the Patanjali Sutras. This is a systematised path which ends in samadhi, or peace. It has elements of the above yogas and more.

The Buddha's "noble eightfold path" is believed by some to have influenced Patanjali's sutras (or narrative threads) in the form of a system. These yogic practices had existed centuries or millennia prior to their 250 BC discovery on bamboo-leaf parchment, but they were written here in a deeply resonant Sanskrit form that put the practices into context.

My teacher says that when you are working and doing, you are a karma yogi. When you are loving, you are a Bhakti yogi, and so on.

The first three yogas above are really the foundation of Raja yoga, and there are many other yogas aside from these.

The benefits of the cultures and religions most certainly should be shared with all who need them in the world. Some will naturally be drawn to certain ones. I'm not much of a devotional type. I simply don't get Christianity, Islam or Hinduism, although these religions do include yoga practices that are not just Bhakti.

I'm more drawn to Raja yoga and Buddhist practices, primarily to still my mind, feelings and expectations.

All cultures and religions are not the same, but we need to be curious about them all to understand our friends who use them.

It's worth saying that the cultures and religions also have their dark tendencies that need to be avoided. The method itself is not the aim. Nothing is fundamental beyond love, curiousity and awareness. Anything that teaches hate or intolerance or closed-minded absolutes is to be avoided at all costs.


Beautifully put. I love it when you take the time.

As to your bafflement of Christianity; is that more so in the accepted application of the church or the teachings of Jesus?

Because, and i hasten to explain that my understanding of Hindu and Buddhism is by far inferior to your own, i've always thought that JC kinda fit in with the nicer bits quite nicely. As does the value placed on introspection and charity of Mohammed.

The golden rule, do unto others, is common in most religions and spiritual, moral and ethical  systems .. at least as i understand it is. And this commonality represents my inclinations the best. What unites us, irrespective of religion , agnosticism or atheism.

Stuffed if i know why people get caught up on being right. And it's usually the ones complaining the hardest about others. Completely, of course, ignoring the golden rule.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 4th, 2019 at 3:04am
No, Mother, I just mean I don't get religious devotion. I find it very hard to muster up any feeling for a picture of Krishna, say, or the Virgin Mary.

I also don't understand how Jesus dying admonishes any of my sins. These are habits we need to eradicate in ourselves.

But I know that for some, a sincere focus on an external personality helps them to remove these habits and find love and respect for others.

People tell me I'm too "in my head", and they're right.

Thus - I go for Jnana yoga.

(But that's just moi.)

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 3:17am

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 3:04am:
No, Mother, I just mean I don't get religious devotion. I find it very hard to muster up any feeling for a picture of Krishna, say, or the Virgin Mary.

I also don't understand how Jesus dying admonishes any of my sins. These are habits we need to eradicate in ourselves.

But I know that for some, a sincere focus on an external personality helps them to remove these habits and find love and respect for others.

People tell me I'm too "in my head", and they're right.

Thus - I go for Jnana yoga.

(But that's just moi.)


My father is a little the same. He trained to be a Jesuit priest before giving in, as he puts it, to "original sin". Devoted church man all my life but he's more of a Buddhist than anything these days. Although he still dutifully accompanies my mother to church.

But he rejects any form of symbolism or ritual categorically as devious. I see his point ... to a point.

As for the grotesque images designed to traumatise children of thehorrible  end of JC, couldn't agree more. It was largely me not understanding why i had to go to confession if he died for my sins, my mother's insistence that my cat wouldn't go to heaven and nobody being able to tell me who God's mummy was that first inspired my rebellion.

But i do take some comfort in riitual and symbolism. Just the nice ones.



Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 3:21am
In all honesty though, i find most religions written by men, for men. 

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 4th, 2019 at 3:26am
Well, the telos of the counter-reformation is reason, Mother. It makes perfect sense for Jesuits to become Buddhists in old age. Plenty of those on Buddhist retreats are lapsed Catholics.

Especially the Tibetan ones - all those prayer wheels, brass and incense.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 3:30am
It's the four noble truths that got him. Stopped him quoting the Desiderata at me after years and years and years. Made a nice change.

He's not into the bells and whistles but he does have a solar powered laughing Buddha in the garden. Mum got it for him. She was being supportive. He keeps it amongst his azaleas.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:06am

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 10:57pm:
You are so obsessed with making this about me and my personal beliefs FD, you totally forgot to address the actual point. Again.

For the record, if a muslim worked for an organisation that expressely strove to make their public image one of standing up against anti-semitism - then I reckon it would be perfectly fine and proper for them to sack him if he repeatedly went on social media to say that jews are a mindless collective with no individual personality. Especially so if they had gone to the trouble of warning him the first time he did it that he would be sacked if he continued doing it.



polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 3rd, 2019 at 11:23pm:
You are starting to go into raving mode FD.

The pre-conditions I set out are eminently clear and self-explanatory. Snide little digs at muslims disguised as legitimate inquiry don't conceal your ducking and weaving of the actual point here.


So having Jews as customers is not sufficient? A business has to take a political stance first?

Don't you think all businesses have expressed policies that are incompatible with anti-semitism, or do they have to specifically mention anti-semitism in particular?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 4th, 2019 at 11:12am

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:06am:
Don't you think all businesses have expressed policies that are incompatible with anti-semitism, or do they have to specifically mention anti-semitism in particular?


It was an example, a deliberately crude one.

A more realistic one would be insisting their employees conduct themselves in public in a way that treats all cultures and races with respect and equally. To me that would reasonably rule out calling jews a mindless collective with no individuality repeatedly on social media. Apparently you wouldn't?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:59pm

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:07am:

Setanta wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:54am:

Karnal wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 12:49am:
You'll notice FD ran off without answering your question, G, followed by the appearance of Setanta, who steered you into their cunning campaign against the Muselman, right?

Freeeeedom, innit.


I'm FD's sock obviously K. Occam's razor, init.

I think FD and I differ though, I don't like any religion. Why do people choose to be slaves?


Oh, I think you like some religions more that others, Setanta.

Why do some people choose to be tinted?

Why do some tinted people choose to go to white countries and then complain that people notice and often dislike their tinted ways? Why dont they choose to go to another tinted country? Are they ALL shitholes?


Challenge: name tinted countries that are not shitholes and explain why the tinted people from shitholes are not infesting them.
Hint: wacism.




Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:00pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 11:12am:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:06am:
Don't you think all businesses have expressed policies that are incompatible with anti-semitism, or do they have to specifically mention anti-semitism in particular?


It was an example, a deliberately crude one.

A more realistic one would be insisting their employees conduct themselves in public in a way that treats all cultures and races with respect and equally. To me that would reasonably rule out calling jews a mindless collective with no individuality repeatedly on social media. Apparently you wouldn't?

They are not equal so you cant treat them "with equality".

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 11:12am:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:06am:
Don't you think all businesses have expressed policies that are incompatible with anti-semitism, or do they have to specifically mention anti-semitism in particular?


It was an example, a deliberately crude one.

A more realistic one would be insisting their employees conduct themselves in public in a way that treats all cultures and races with respect and equally. To me that would reasonably rule out calling jews a mindless collective with no individuality repeatedly on social media. Apparently you wouldn't?


So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?

Regardless of whether the company specially identify themselves as being anti anti semitism?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?


freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
Regardless of whether the company specially identify themselves as being anti anti semitism?


Depending entirely on what their terms of employment are, and how they interpret that.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:57pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?



That's why people are very reluctant to hire anyone called Mohammed, Abdul, Jihad or anyone overtly Mohammedan??


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:03pm

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?



That's why people are very reluctant to hire anyone called Mohammed, Abdul, Jihad or anyone overtly Mohammedan??


Oh? So the oft cited higher rate for unemployment amongst the Arabic community is a direct result of discrimination and not because they are all lay welfare cheats?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:16pm

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:03pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?



That's why people are very reluctant to hire anyone called Mohammed, Abdul, Jihad or anyone overtly Mohammedan??


Oh? So the oft cited higher rate for unemployment amongst the Arabic community is a direct result of discrimination and not because they are all lay welfare cheats?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Both. They lie, cheat, and play victim.

Oily liars.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:25pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?


Since all sorts of anti-discrimination laws came into place. Your employer is no longer allowed to fire you for hanging out in a gay bar, going to a mosque, attending a political protest, or blaming victims of genocide for their own demise on account of them being a mindless collective of treacherous Jews (so long as you clan blame it on your religion of course.)


Quote:
Depending entirely on what their terms of employment are, and how they interpret that.


It previously depending on a public political stance made by the company. You even pointed out that you were very clear on the conditions. Have they changed?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:29pm

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:16pm:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:03pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?



That's why people are very reluctant to hire anyone called Mohammed, Abdul, Jihad or anyone overtly Mohammedan??


Oh? So the oft cited higher rate for unemployment amongst the Arabic community is a direct result of discrimination and not because they are all lay welfare cheats?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Both. They lie, cheat, and play victim.

Oily liars.


How could it be both? They naturally cancel each other out.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:28am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:29pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:16pm:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:03pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?



That's why people are very reluctant to hire anyone called Mohammed, Abdul, Jihad or anyone overtly Mohammedan??


Oh? So the oft cited higher rate for unemployment amongst the Arabic community is a direct result of discrimination and not because they are all lay welfare cheats?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Both. They lie, cheat, and play victim.

Oily liars.


How could it be both? They naturally cancel each other out.



Not necessarily - some lead multiple lives and multiple wives....   :-?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Setanta on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:42am

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:29pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:16pm:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:03pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?



That's why people are very reluctant to hire anyone called Mohammed, Abdul, Jihad or anyone overtly Mohammedan??


Oh? So the oft cited higher rate for unemployment amongst the Arabic community is a direct result of discrimination and not because they are all lay welfare cheats?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Both. They lie, cheat, and play victim.

Oily liars.


How could it be both? They naturally cancel each other out.


Naturally cancel each other out or compound each other?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by mothra on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:00am

Setanta wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:42am:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:29pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:16pm:

mothra wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:03pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:57pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?



That's why people are very reluctant to hire anyone called Mohammed, Abdul, Jihad or anyone overtly Mohammedan??


Oh? So the oft cited higher rate for unemployment amongst the Arabic community is a direct result of discrimination and not because they are all lay welfare cheats?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Both. They lie, cheat, and play victim.

Oily liars.


How could it be both? They naturally cancel each other out.


Naturally cancel each other out or compound each other?


Are you suggesting that prejudice is a self-fulfilling prophesy? Heaven forfend!

Or perhaps you misunderstand the premise?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 5th, 2019 at 10:03am

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?


Since all sorts of anti-discrimination laws came into place. Your employer is no longer allowed to fire you for hanging out in a gay bar, going to a mosque, attending a political protest, or blaming victims of genocide for their own demise on account of them being a mindless collective of treacherous Jews (so long as you clan blame it on your religion of course.)


None of which involves repeatedly breaching the terms of a signed code of conduct on a public platform like twitter. You're right, employers can't fire you for being gay or muslim - but they can fire you for publicly expressing hate speech - if you signed a contract/code of conduct promising you wouldn't express hate speech. Even if such expression is somehow a vital part of your religious beliefs. You wouldn't and don't dispute an employers right to sack one of their employees for publicly calling for jews to be gassed in ovens - not even if its stated specifically as their religious belief.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Aug 5th, 2019 at 10:58am

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 10:03am:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?


Since all sorts of anti-discrimination laws came into place. Your employer is no longer allowed to fire you for hanging out in a gay bar, going to a mosque, attending a political protest, or blaming victims of genocide for their own demise on account of them being a mindless collective of treacherous Jews (so long as you clan blame it on your religion of course.)


None of which involves repeatedly breaching the terms of a signed code of conduct on a public platform like twitter. You're right, employers can't fire you for being gay or muslim - but they can fire you for publicly expressing hate speech - if you signed a contract/code of conduct promising you wouldn't express hate speech. Even if such expression is somehow a vital part of your religious beliefs. You wouldn't and don't dispute an employers right to sack one of their employees for publicly calling for jews to be gassed in ovens - not even if its stated specifically as their religious belief.


And it's amazing how broad the brush of the left is when it comes to what actually constitutes "hate speech".  ::)


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by cods on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Ye Grappler on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:03pm

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.


Well said, cods... name-calling will only make things worse and invite a negative response.

Call me a homophobe for disagreeing with some tenet of the Gay faith, and I will say:- "then Falc the poofs!" etc.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:08pm

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.


Virtue-signalling, innit. Some people love laws - especially laws that don't do anything. Laws to send tinted criminals BACK TO WHERE THEY CAME FROM or do background checks for tinted immigrants are rather popular, despite the fact that these are already laws and policies.

Another popular one is stopping tinted immigrants getting the dole and public housing. How very dare they? My friend had to wait 20 years for a Housing Commission flat and these Gollywogs move straight in!

Alas, dear, immigrants are not eligible for the dole or public housing, but that doesn't stop the virtue-signallers getting all mixed up.

You?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:10pm

Quote:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry right wing people are getting.



fixed it for you cods

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by cods on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:50pm

Ye Grappler wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:03pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.


Well said, cods... name-calling will only make things worse and invite a negative response.

Call me a homophobe for disagreeing with some tenet of the Gay faith, and I will say:- "then Falc the poofs!" etc.




its the rage that gets me...its getting uglier dont you think?...

I dont think its a good thing to use a minority group as a weapon against others.....to me thats small minded

  being Gay is no one business these days  and from what I read about them  they are neither violent towards other groups....or demean other groups .. they are a pretty harmless minority as far as i am concerned  I would rather people left them alone...

Folau has chosen to use them as an example of badness  as if they have chosen the  path that will lead them to hell... what a hide he has got..he has an even bigger hide to call himself a Christian..

.what about Lepers   will they go to hell as well?  after all they too are different.. >:( >:( >:( and in a place they didnt choose...




come on grap

nothing to fear but far itself... sumthing like that

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by John Smith on Aug 5th, 2019 at 6:22pm

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:50pm:
its the rage that gets me...its getting uglier dont you think?...

I dont think its a good thing to use a minority group as a weapon against others.....to me thats small minded

  being Gay is no one business these days  and from what I read about them  they are neither violent towards other groups....or demean other groups .. they are a pretty harmless minority as far as i am concerned  I would rather people left them alone...

Folau has chosen to use them as an example of badness  as if they have chosen the  path that will lead them to hell... what a hide he has got..he has an even bigger hide to call himself a Christian..

.what about Lepers   will they go to hell as well?  after all they too are different.. Angry Angry Angry and in a place they didnt choose...



well said cods



by the way, gandalf needs you to knit him a wooly jumper, you up for it?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 5th, 2019 at 10:29pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 10:03am:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 9:25pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 6:17pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2019 at 1:32pm:
So pretty much any company could refuse to hire someone, or fire someone, based on them posting mindless collective of treacherous Jews memes on the internet?


Why not?

Since when has it been deemed unfair or improper for a company to take into account a candidate's public conduct before deciding to employ them?


Since all sorts of anti-discrimination laws came into place. Your employer is no longer allowed to fire you for hanging out in a gay bar, going to a mosque, attending a political protest, or blaming victims of genocide for their own demise on account of them being a mindless collective of treacherous Jews (so long as you clan blame it on your religion of course.)


None of which involves repeatedly breaching the terms of a signed code of conduct on a public platform like twitter. You're right, employers can't fire you for being gay or muslim - but they can fire you for publicly expressing hate speech - if you signed a contract/code of conduct promising you wouldn't express hate speech. Even if such expression is somehow a vital part of your religious beliefs. You wouldn't and don't dispute an employers right to sack one of their employees for publicly calling for jews to be gassed in ovens - not even if its stated specifically as their religious belief.


Hate speech is a pretty nebulous term Gandalf. It does not boil down to anything inherent to what you say, or even to your intentions, but rather to whether people choose to be offended by it. Take Folau for example. As far as I can tell, he does not hate gays any more than the rest of the people on his list. There is no way of detecting hate in his speech other than what other people project onto it.

Would you consider it fair for any company to fire you based on what you posted here about the Banu Qurayza?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 6th, 2019 at 9:20am

freediver wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 10:29pm:
Hate speech is a pretty nebulous term Gandalf.


Thats really funny coming from someone whose entire argument is based on insisting that we must differentiate one of the most nebulus terms imaginable - 'religious belief'.

I have no doubt Folau doesn't hate gays, and yes identifying what constitutes breaching the clause "Treat everyone equally, fairly and with dignity regardless of gender or gender identity, sexual orientation" - is vague and open to interpretation. But guess what? The employer - ie the ones that make the clause get to make that interpretation (within reason I suppose). To me the key here is that RA actually notified Folau the first time that they considered it a breach. Folau presumably disagreed, but he should have known there and then that it was RA's perogative to interpret if and how their own clauses are breached. And Folau signed that contract containing that clause. So tough titties.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 6th, 2019 at 9:42am

John Smith wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 6:22pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:50pm:
its the rage that gets me...its getting uglier dont you think?...

I dont think its a good thing to use a minority group as a weapon against others.....to me thats small minded

  being Gay is no one business these days  and from what I read about them  they are neither violent towards other groups....or demean other groups .. they are a pretty harmless minority as far as i am concerned  I would rather people left them alone...

Folau has chosen to use them as an example of badness  as if they have chosen the  path that will lead them to hell... what a hide he has got..he has an even bigger hide to call himself a Christian..

.what about Lepers   will they go to hell as well?  after all they too are different.. Angry Angry Angry and in a place they didnt choose...



well said cods



by the way, gandalf needs you to knit him a wooly jumper, you up for it?


Yes, a good post from cods.

[smiley=thumbsup.gif]

And yes, gandalf needs a jumper cods.

https://woolshed.com.au/

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Aug 6th, 2019 at 6:07pm

mothra wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:00am:
Are you suggesting that prejudice is a self-fulfilling prophesy? Heaven forfend!

Or perhaps you misunderstand the premise?



Most of the coverage focused on the fact that Bangladeshi and black British workers earn a lot less than white people, more than two quid per hour in the case of Bangladeshis and one quid in the case of black British people. Structural racism, then, you see. Except for the slightly inconvenient point that way out there at the top of the earnings chart were the Chinese, who earned almost four quid more per hour than the whites, and indeed Indians, who earned almost £1.50 more. So if it is racism, it’s a very specific and discriminatory form of racism.

Pakistanis also do very badly by comparison, earning over three pounds less per hour than the Indians, whom they closely resemble and with whom they were once conjoined in a glorious and happy empire. How, then, can racism be to blame for this discrepancy? And if it’s not racism, then what is the cause?

The first answer might be to look at a few other statistics, such as those charting educational attainment by ethnicity. These figures — produced by the Department for Education — mirror almost exactly those earnings figures, with one or two discrepancies. For GCSEs, the Chinese come top, by a mile, the Indians come second. White British come a little further down the list, easily beaten by white Irish. Level with the white British are black people of African descent; only in the headlines are they grouped together with black British people of Caribbean heritage, who perform less well.

Now, the discrepancies. First, bottom of the list for academic attainment by a hefty margin are children from Roma/traveller families — and they were not included in that ONS survey, for reasons I will leave you to work out. And second, Bangladeshis out-perform white British kids at GCSE (although they are still well below the Indians and Chinese).

What might explain the gap between this comparative success and the low earnings of the adult population? Is it possible that the top employers would baulk at taking on someone called Mohammed, but have no aversion to the names Anand or Patel? Possibly, and we should allow for that caveat. But it is also true that of Britain’s ethnic minority communities, Pakistani and — especially — Bangladeshi adults are the least likely to speak English fluently or indeed at all. Sajid Javid highlighted this point in a government green paper — some 770,000 people in the UK have either a frail or nonexistent grasp of English, the overwhelming majority being Pakistanis and Bangladeshis.

Add to that the fact that Bangladeshi families (again from Javid’s green paper) are the least likely to take advantage of free child-care facilities, and you begin to understand why, though Bangladeshi children generally do well at school, their elders are behind in the labour market. Too many of the older generation are unable to speak English. It is also true that both Bangladeshis and Pakistanis often come from working-class backgrounds, whereas Indians and Chinese are more predominantly (although far from exclusively) middle class.

So, to sum up: first, whatever the reason for those discrepancies between ethnic minorities in earnings, racism is almost certainly not the cause. Second, the headline figure — that ethnic minorities earn 3.8 per cent less than the white British — is utterly meaningless, given the vastly different level of earnings within ethnic minority communities. Third, the most obvious explanation for disparity in earnings can be found in the figures for educational attainment: communities which value education the most highly go on to earn the most money, with the exception of Bangladeshis, who may be hampered by having insufficient language skills. Whatever the cause, then, it ain’t race.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/07/the-ethnicity-pay-gap-just-doesnt-add-up/

Not fitting in is the self-fulfilling prophesy: you self-select out, you ARE left out.

Fit in or rack off, as the poet Tshirt says.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Frank on Aug 6th, 2019 at 6:09pm

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:50pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:03pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.


Well said, cods... name-calling will only make things worse and invite a negative response.

Call me a homophobe for disagreeing with some tenet of the Gay faith, and I will say:- "then Falc the poofs!" etc.




its the rage that gets me...its getting uglier dont you think?...

I dont think its a good thing to use a minority group as a weapon against others.....to me thats small minded

  being Gay is no one business these days  and from what I read about them  they are neither violent towards other groups....or demean other groups .. they are a pretty harmless minority as far as i am concerned  I would rather people left them alone...

Folau has chosen to use them as an example of badness  as if they have chosen the  path that will lead them to hell... what a hide he has got..he has an even bigger hide to call himself a Christian..

.what about Lepers   will they go to hell as well?  after all they too are different.. >:( >:( >:( and in a place they didnt choose...




come on grap

nothing to fear but far itself... sumthing like that



Er... sin is entirely about choice. Very important detail, keep it in mind.


Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm
Gandalf would you consider it fair for any company to fire you based on what you posted here about the Banu Qurayza?


polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 9:20am:

freediver wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 10:29pm:
Hate speech is a pretty nebulous term Gandalf.


Thats really funny coming from someone whose entire argument is based on insisting that we must differentiate one of the most nebulus terms imaginable - 'religious belief'.

I have no doubt Folau doesn't hate gays, and yes identifying what constitutes breaching the clause "Treat everyone equally, fairly and with dignity regardless of gender or gender identity, sexual orientation" - is vague and open to interpretation. But guess what? The employer - ie the ones that make the clause get to make that interpretation (within reason I suppose). To me the key here is that RA actually notified Folau the first time that they considered it a breach. Folau presumably disagreed, but he should have known there and then that it was RA's perogative to interpret if and how their own clauses are breached. And Folau signed that contract containing that clause. So tough titties.


I am yet to see any serious disagreement on here about what is a religious belief. There is pretty much constant disagreement on the meaning of hate speech. A significant number of people here would deny it has any meaning.


Quote:
To me the key here is that RA actually notified Folau


To me that is irrelevant. I can't figure out why people keep making a point of it. Even the papers do. Giving advance warning cannot turn a bad policy into a good one, and politely explaining to an employee that you are denying them the right to express their religious views does not change what you are doing.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Raven on Aug 7th, 2019 at 12:30pm

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:

Quote:
To me the key here is that RA actually notified Folau


To me that is irrelevant. I can't figure out why people keep making a point of it. Even the papers do. Giving advance warning cannot turn a bad policy into a good one, and politely explaining to an employee that you are denying them the right to express their religious views does not change what you are doing.


Well that's the thing you have the right to express your views no matter what, just be prepared for the consequences.

You seem to want to live in a fantasy world where actions do not have consequences. Any society that lives like that will collapse.

Freedom of expression does not mean freedom from consequences.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by cods on Aug 7th, 2019 at 12:49pm

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 6:09pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:50pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:03pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.


Well said, cods... name-calling will only make things worse and invite a negative response.

Call me a homophobe for disagreeing with some tenet of the Gay faith, and I will say:- "then Falc the poofs!" etc.




its the rage that gets me...its getting uglier dont you think?...

I dont think its a good thing to use a minority group as a weapon against others.....to me thats small minded

  being Gay is no one business these days  and from what I read about them  they are neither violent towards other groups....or demean other groups .. they are a pretty harmless minority as far as i am concerned  I would rather people left them alone...

Folau has chosen to use them as an example of badness  as if they have chosen the  path that will lead them to hell... what a hide he has got..he has an even bigger hide to call himself a Christian..

.what about Lepers   will they go to hell as well?  after all they too are different.. >:( >:( >:( and in a place they didnt choose...




come on grap

nothing to fear but far itself... sumthing like that



Er... sin is entirely about choice. Very important detail, keep it in mind.





are lepers and gays born?   or do they choose?...

:-/ :-/

you tell me!


I always thought they were born ....but!


there but for the grace of god go I..


we are all sinners frank.. yes even you pet!

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 7th, 2019 at 1:07pm

Raven wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 12:30pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:

Quote:
To me the key here is that RA actually notified Folau


To me that is irrelevant. I can't figure out why people keep making a point of it. Even the papers do. Giving advance warning cannot turn a bad policy into a good one, and politely explaining to an employee that you are denying them the right to express their religious views does not change what you are doing.


Well that's the thing you have the right to express your views no matter what, just be prepared for the consequences.

You seem to want to live in a fantasy world where actions do not have consequences. Any society that lives like that will collapse.

Freedom of expression does not mean freedom from consequences.


Rugby Australia is now facing the consequences of illegally firing Folau.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Captain Caveman on Aug 7th, 2019 at 2:05pm

freediver wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 1:07pm:

Raven wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 12:30pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:

Quote:
To me the key here is that RA actually notified Folau


To me that is irrelevant. I can't figure out why people keep making a point of it. Even the papers do. Giving advance warning cannot turn a bad policy into a good one, and politely explaining to an employee that you are denying them the right to express their religious views does not change what you are doing.


Well that's the thing you have the right to express your views no matter what, just be prepared for the consequences.

You seem to want to live in a fantasy world where actions do not have consequences. Any society that lives like that will collapse.

Freedom of expression does not mean freedom from consequences.


Rugby Australia is now facing the consequences of illegally firing Folau.



Good.
Hopefully Qantas is too.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Gnads on Aug 7th, 2019 at 2:39pm

cods wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 12:49pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 6:09pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:50pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:03pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.


Well said, cods... name-calling will only make things worse and invite a negative response.

Call me a homophobe for disagreeing with some tenet of the Gay faith, and I will say:- "then Falc the poofs!" etc.




its the rage that gets me...its getting uglier dont you think?...

I dont think its a good thing to use a minority group as a weapon against others.....to me thats small minded

  being Gay is no one business these days  and from what I read about them  they are neither violent towards other groups....or demean other groups .. they are a pretty harmless minority as far as i am concerned  I would rather people left them alone...

Folau has chosen to use them as an example of badness  as if they have chosen the  path that will lead them to hell... what a hide he has got..he has an even bigger hide to call himself a Christian..

.what about Lepers   will they go to hell as well?  after all they too are different.. >:( >:( >:( and in a place they didnt choose...




come on grap

nothing to fear but far itself... sumthing like that



Er... sin is entirely about choice. Very important detail, keep it in mind.





are lepers and gays born?   or do they choose?...

:-/ :-/

you tell me!


I always thought they were born ....but!


there but for the grace of god go I..


we are all sinners frank.. yes even you pet!


No one is born a Leper  ;D It's a bacterial infection ......

it can be spread by coughing or sneezing.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 7th, 2019 at 3:44pm

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
Gandalf would you consider it fair for any company to fire you based on what you posted here about the Banu Qurayza?


Based on what i actually posted - no, based on the racist words you shoved down my throat and pretended I said - probably - provided of course I willingly signed a contract in effect saying I wouldn't be racist like that, and after they had warned me that they considered those words racist and in breach of my contract.


freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
I am yet to see any serious disagreement on here about what is a religious belief. There is pretty much constant disagreement on the meaning of hate speech.


Suffice to say I don't think anyone would disagree that calling on jews to be gassed in ovens is hate speech. Its also perfectly plausible that it could also be a religious belief. A person's religious belief is literally what the person claims it to be - as no one is in any position to say otherwise. While we all disagree on what constitute unacceptable hate speech, I think I can safely nevertheless say that we all agree that such speech exists. And if it does exist, and if 'religious belief' can be absolutely anything, then it is undeniable that this apparently sanctified, untouchable thing you call "religious belief" - can, and no doubt does, include hate speech. At that point, we are left with no other choice but to accept that 'religious belief' is not always the sanctified, untouchable privilege you make it out to be.

Since your only argument seems to be the need to uphold the sanctity of religious beliefs, you would presumably be ok if RA had said "thou shalt not smear gays - unless its an expression of 'religious belief', in which case its quite alright" - yes? Which is of course laughable.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Raven on Aug 7th, 2019 at 7:11pm

freediver wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 1:07pm:

Raven wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 12:30pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:

Quote:
To me the key here is that RA actually notified Folau


To me that is irrelevant. I can't figure out why people keep making a point of it. Even the papers do. Giving advance warning cannot turn a bad policy into a good one, and politely explaining to an employee that you are denying them the right to express their religious views does not change what you are doing.


Well that's the thing you have the right to express your views no matter what, just be prepared for the consequences.

You seem to want to live in a fantasy world where actions do not have consequences. Any society that lives like that will collapse.

Freedom of expression does not mean freedom from consequences.


Rugby Australia is now facing the consequences of illegally firing Folau.


Do you believe this woman should have been sacked?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 7th, 2019 at 7:14pm

Gnads wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 2:39pm:

cods wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 12:49pm:

Frank wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 6:09pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 5:50pm:

Ye Grappler wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 12:03pm:

cods wrote on Aug 5th, 2019 at 11:11am:
has anyone noticed the more LAWS we bring in the more angry people are getting.??

or should that be "anti"...I have never seen such [ugly] talk on any forum as we see today.

the language some use is so full of hate and aggression  yet I wonder if they have actually had to deal with anything that comes close to what they describe in a personal way.  ::) ::)

I will be honest   I dont believe I have ever met a muslim  and I dont believe I need any LAW to tell me how to behave let alone what to think...

no law will stop peoples attitude...if someone makes up their mind about a certain group  then calling them names like racist wont change their way of thinking  it will in fact make them worse...Labels and Laws do bugger all.


Well said, cods... name-calling will only make things worse and invite a negative response.

Call me a homophobe for disagreeing with some tenet of the Gay faith, and I will say:- "then Falc the poofs!" etc.




its the rage that gets me...its getting uglier dont you think?...

I dont think its a good thing to use a minority group as a weapon against others.....to me thats small minded

  being Gay is no one business these days  and from what I read about them  they are neither violent towards other groups....or demean other groups .. they are a pretty harmless minority as far as i am concerned  I would rather people left them alone...

Folau has chosen to use them as an example of badness  as if they have chosen the  path that will lead them to hell... what a hide he has got..he has an even bigger hide to call himself a Christian..

.what about Lepers   will they go to hell as well?  after all they too are different.. >:( >:( >:( and in a place they didnt choose...




come on grap

nothing to fear but far itself... sumthing like that



Er... sin is entirely about choice. Very important detail, keep it in mind.





are lepers and gays born?   or do they choose?...

:-/ :-/

you tell me!


I always thought they were born ....but!


there but for the grace of god go I..


we are all sinners frank.. yes even you pet!


No one is born a Leper  ;D It's a bacterial infection ......

it can be spread by coughing or sneezing.


Yes, the old boy caught that, poor thing.

It can also be spread by stool, you see.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 7th, 2019 at 7:34pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 3:44pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
Gandalf would you consider it fair for any company to fire you based on what you posted here about the Banu Qurayza?


Based on what i actually posted - no, based on the racist words you shoved down my throat and pretended I said - probably - provided of course I willingly signed a contract in effect saying I wouldn't be racist like that, and after they had warned me that they considered those words racist and in breach of my contract.


freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
I am yet to see any serious disagreement on here about what is a religious belief. There is pretty much constant disagreement on the meaning of hate speech.


Suffice to say I don't think anyone would disagree that calling on jews to be gassed in ovens is hate speech. Its also perfectly plausible that it could also be a religious belief. A person's religious belief is literally what the person claims it to be - as no one is in any position to say otherwise. While we all disagree on what constitute unacceptable hate speech, I think I can safely nevertheless say that we all agree that such speech exists. And if it does exist, and if 'religious belief' can be absolutely anything, then it is undeniable that this apparently sanctified, untouchable thing you call "religious belief" - can, and no doubt does, include hate speech. At that point, we are left with no other choice but to accept that 'religious belief' is not always the sanctified, untouchable privilege you make it out to be.

Since your only argument seems to be the need to uphold the sanctity of religious beliefs, you would presumably be ok if RA had said "thou shalt not smear gays - unless its an expression of 'religious belief', in which case its quite alright" - yes? Which is of course laughable.


That may be so, G, but what if your employer discovered your views on executing gays who do it Mardi Gras-style?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 7th, 2019 at 7:59pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 3:44pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
Gandalf would you consider it fair for any company to fire you based on what you posted here about the Banu Qurayza?


Based on what i actually posted - no, based on the racist words you shoved down my throat and pretended I said - probably - provided of course I willingly signed a contract in effect saying I wouldn't be racist like that, and after they had warned me that they considered those words racist and in breach of my contract.


freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
I am yet to see any serious disagreement on here about what is a religious belief. There is pretty much constant disagreement on the meaning of hate speech.


Suffice to say I don't think anyone would disagree that calling on jews to be gassed in ovens is hate speech. Its also perfectly plausible that it could also be a religious belief. A person's religious belief is literally what the person claims it to be - as no one is in any position to say otherwise. While we all disagree on what constitute unacceptable hate speech, I think I can safely nevertheless say that we all agree that such speech exists. And if it does exist, and if 'religious belief' can be absolutely anything, then it is undeniable that this apparently sanctified, untouchable thing you call "religious belief" - can, and no doubt does, include hate speech. At that point, we are left with no other choice but to accept that 'religious belief' is not always the sanctified, untouchable privilege you make it out to be.

Since your only argument seems to be the need to uphold the sanctity of religious beliefs, you would presumably be ok if RA had said "thou shalt not smear gays - unless its an expression of 'religious belief', in which case its quite alright" - yes? Which is of course laughable.


Did you actually say that they were literally a mindless collective with literally no individual personality whatsoever?

Does your contract have to single out this particular form of racism, or would the usual clauses cover it?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 7th, 2019 at 8:07pm

freediver wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 7:59pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 3:44pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
Gandalf would you consider it fair for any company to fire you based on what you posted here about the Banu Qurayza?


Based on what i actually posted - no, based on the racist words you shoved down my throat and pretended I said - probably - provided of course I willingly signed a contract in effect saying I wouldn't be racist like that, and after they had warned me that they considered those words racist and in breach of my contract.


freediver wrote on Aug 6th, 2019 at 10:24pm:
I am yet to see any serious disagreement on here about what is a religious belief. There is pretty much constant disagreement on the meaning of hate speech.


Suffice to say I don't think anyone would disagree that calling on jews to be gassed in ovens is hate speech. Its also perfectly plausible that it could also be a religious belief. A person's religious belief is literally what the person claims it to be - as no one is in any position to say otherwise. While we all disagree on what constitute unacceptable hate speech, I think I can safely nevertheless say that we all agree that such speech exists. And if it does exist, and if 'religious belief' can be absolutely anything, then it is undeniable that this apparently sanctified, untouchable thing you call "religious belief" - can, and no doubt does, include hate speech. At that point, we are left with no other choice but to accept that 'religious belief' is not always the sanctified, untouchable privilege you make it out to be.

Since your only argument seems to be the need to uphold the sanctity of religious beliefs, you would presumably be ok if RA had said "thou shalt not smear gays - unless its an expression of 'religious belief', in which case its quite alright" - yes? Which is of course laughable.


Did you actually say that they were literally a mindless collective with literally no individual personality whatsoever?

Does your contract have to single out this particular form of racism, or would the usual clauses cover it?


No, FD, that's what you said, remember? Mindless Collective, no individuality whatsoever, so unfair.

G said it when he quoted you.

We discussed this one for about 6 months a couple of years back. It was all fleshed out and quoted. You must have forgot again, you silly thing.

Shurely shome mishtake, eh? I do hope you haven't caught the old boy's stool disease.

Miam miam, no?

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 8th, 2019 at 12:13pm

freediver wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 7:59pm:
Does your contract have to single out this particular form of racism, or would the usual clauses cover it?


Depends what "the usual clauses" actually say. What is your point here exactly?

What matters here is that Folau signed a contract saying he wouldn't dis people for their sexual orientation. He then proceeded to do just that by saying gays are sinful for being gay and clearly implied they are in the same moral boat as rapists and thieves.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by freediver on Aug 8th, 2019 at 12:21pm
My point is that you would fall foul of the same clause - if Jews went on the same sort of victimhood trip that gays and Muslims do. Fortunately for you and your racist ilk, they don't.

The contracts mostly all say the same thing on this. They are copied and pasted. Plenty of mine have been copied and pasted with the typical copy and paste errors. My previous one didn't even bother updating the references properly.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 8th, 2019 at 12:24pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 8th, 2019 at 12:13pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 7th, 2019 at 7:59pm:
Does your contract have to single out this particular form of racism, or would the usual clauses cover it?


Depends what "the usual clauses" actually say. What is your point here exactly?

What matters here is that Folau signed a contract saying he wouldn't dis people for their sexual orientation. He then proceeded to do just that by saying gays are sinful for being gay and clearly implied they are in the same moral boat as rapists and thieves.


More than that, G, Folou had been "counselled" on RA's non-discriminatory message. Folou took a public stance against his employer's values.

The latest High Court decision on public servants, of course, destroys Folou's case entirely. Imagine, employees can now be sacked for anonymously questioning their employer's policies.

If anything goes against FD's cherished ideal of Freeeedom, it is this.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Abu on Aug 8th, 2019 at 12:29pm

freediver wrote on Aug 8th, 2019 at 12:21pm:
My point is that you would fall foul of the same clause - if Jews went on the same sort of victimhood trip that gays and Muslims do. Fortunately for you and your racist ilk, they don't.

The contracts mostly all say the same thing on this. They are copied and pasted. Plenty of mine have been copied and pasted with the typical copy and paste errors. My previous one didn't even bother updating the references properly.


Jews have been on a victimhood trip since the birth of Zionism in the 18th century.

They have every right to too. They still face varying degrees of discrimination around the world.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by polite_gandalf on Aug 8th, 2019 at 1:46pm

freediver wrote on Aug 8th, 2019 at 12:21pm:
My point is that you would fall foul of the same clause - if Jews went on the same sort of victimhood trip that gays and Muslims do. Fortunately for you and your racist ilk, they don't.


Laughable. How do you reckon Friedrick Toben would go getting a job at the Simon Wiesenthal centre of something similar - even if he was the most qualified candidate in the world? If I had really said the things about jews you claim I said, then it would simply be a waste of time me applying for any job at any organisation thats even remotely jewish. To say that for any candidate they wouldn't trawl through all their online profiles looking for evidence of anti-semitism, and that if they found one it wouldn't adversely affect their candidacy (and rightly so) - is the height of absurdity.


Quote:
The contracts mostly all say the same thing on this. They are copied and pasted. Plenty of mine have been copied and pasted with the typical copy and paste errors. My previous one didn't even bother updating the references properly.


Which is why they warned him first. It would be understandable that Folau might think the contract that he signed was full of meaningless virtue signalling that no one really cared about, or were even aware of. Still, the high profile public campaigns RA did specifically about equal rights for gays - campaigns which funnily enough Folau himself participated in - should have been a red flag for him.

Or perhaps he did know, and went ahead anyway - perhaps even because he knew he would become a martyr for the cultural warriors, not in spite of it.

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by greggerypeccary on Aug 13th, 2019 at 2:10pm

"The Federal Circuit Court has today ordered representative rugby union player Israel Folau to enter into mediation with Rugby Australia and the NSW Waratahs before his unfair dismissal claim goes to trial on February 4 next year.

"Chief Judge Will Alstergren, sitting in Melbourne, set down a timetable for the case, which is based on a claim that his sacking breached religious protections in the Fair Work Act.

"Folau will argue that his social media accounts were unconnected to his employment as a professional rugby player, and primarily used to lawfully communicate religious content in accordance with his faith."

Title: Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Post by Aussie on Aug 13th, 2019 at 2:35pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Aug 13th, 2019 at 2:10pm:

"The Federal Circuit Court has today ordered representative rugby union player Israel Folau to enter into mediation with Rugby Australia and the NSW Waratahs before his unfair dismissal claim goes to trial on February 4 next year.

"Chief Judge Will Alstergren, sitting in Melbourne, set down a timetable for the case, which is based on a claim that his sacking breached religious protections in the Fair Work Act.

"Folau will argue that his social media accounts were unconnected to his employment as a professional rugby player, and primarily used to lawfully communicate religious content in accordance with his faith."


Standard procedure.  Contrary to schmedia reports, this is not a win for RA.

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2020. All Rights Reserved.