Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... 33
Send Topic Print
Folau vs Yassmin (Read 30598 times)
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #90 - 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?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #91 - 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?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #92 - 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?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 71971
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #93 - 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 Cheesy
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #94 - 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).
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 71971
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #95 - 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?  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #96 - 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.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #97 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:26pm
 
FD's about to try an answer.

Right, FD?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #98 - 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 Cheesy


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?

...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #99 - 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?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #100 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:39pm
 
Quote:
Come off it, FD, you can't be serious.


Oh?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91866
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #101 - 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.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #102 - 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.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #103 - 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?
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47067
At my desk.
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #104 - 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?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... 33
Send Topic Print