Israel Folau

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,353
Rubbish. He was asked a question about faith and he answered. He didn't "attack" anyone. As has been said it is standard main stream Christian belief. Christians by the way are also in the "customer base".
He literally posted that drunks, fornicators, gays, other religions and atheists were going to hell. Conservatively that's 60% of the population.
 


Finbar10

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
2,975
When did Mr Jesus say that drunkards would go to hell?

Was it before or after the wedding feast at Cana?
Well, Mr Jesus doesn't always get the final say in Christianity ironically. Probably didn't say anything like that, but Mr. St. Paul did (not getting into the Kingdom of God anyway, which arguably is something similar; Riven will probably split hairs all day with you on that :) ). It's in the Holy Book anyway, so there...! :sneaky:
 

Finbar10

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
2,975
He literally posted that drunks, fornicators, gays, other religions and atheists were going to hell. Conservatively that's 60% of the population.
As is well known in legal circles, the estimated biblicality of an online post is inversely proportional to the percentage of pissed-off punters and the quantity of moolah involved! :giggle:
 

AyaanMyHero

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
1,514
He literally posted that drunks, fornicators, gays, other religions and atheists were going to hell. Conservatively that's 60% of the population.
And 95% of that 60+ percent did not give a toss. We don't have a recognised DFT+ victim group just yet. Drunks-Fornicators-Thieves.
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
34,510
And 95% of that 60+ percent did not give a toss. We don't have a recognised DFT+ victim group just yet. Drunks-Fornicators-Thieves.
Precisely, It was all about the LGBTLMNOP+ people and their feelings. Most of said people properly didn't see it and didn't care but Rugby Oz desperately wanted to be seen to be with it and woke. Hammered 36-0 by the All Blacks, best player gone, team going nowere, falling attendences and no cash. You'd think Rugby Oz would have more pressing matters than a Instagram Post.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,353
Precisely, It was all about the LGBTLMNOP+ people and their feelings. Most of said people properly didn't see it and didn't care but Rugby Oz desperately wanted to be seen to be with it and woke.
Do you have examples of employment contracts which allow you to Insult you customer base as long as only some of the customers see it?

Hammered 36-0 by the All Blacks, best player gone, team going nowere, falling attendences and no cash. You'd think Rugby Oz would have more pressing matters than a Instagram Post.
Do you have examples of employment contracts which allow you to insult the customer base if you’re REALLY good at your job or if your employer isn’t doing well?
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
34,510
Do you have examples of employment contracts which allow you to Insult you customer base as long as only some of the customers see it?
Do you have examples of employment contracts which allow you to insult the customer base if you’re REALLY good at your job or if your employer isn’t doing well?
Have you examples of contracts where Employers forbid you from expressing your religious beliefs in your own time?
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,353
Sure: Social Media Sample Clauses has example of tailoring contracts to cover public utterances And of course the Australian rugby code has clauses about it. Which is the entire point of why they fired him.
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
34,510
Sure: Social Media Sample Clauses has example of tailoring contracts to cover public utterances And of course the Australian rugby code has clauses about it. Which is the entire point of why they fired him.
And? That clause you have linked clearly states the employee can profess their own opinions as long as they state it is a personal opinion and not the banks. Had Izzy used an official Rugby Oz social media platform it would have been an entirely different matter. He used his own account.

Employee’s social media content must reflect that it is the opinion or content of Employee and must not imply any connection to or origination from the Bank
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,353
Ah. So he wasn’t identifying himself as an Aussie rugby player and repeatedly pasting images of himself in his employment then. Oh he was. Ah well.
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
34,510
Ah. So he wasn’t identifying himself as an Aussie rugby player and repeatedly pasting images of himself in his employment then. Oh he was. Ah well.
Anybody who knows Falou knows of his faith. He preaches regularly in his church and posts the sermons on line. He has been doing this for years. All RA had to do was release a staemnt saying that they in no way agree with Falou's views and his views are purely personal. That would have been that.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
31,353
I'm not sure "He's been saying Australia's population will go to hell for years!" is the best approach when he gets to court.

And yes, any organisation can say they're ok with their employee's public condemnation of their customers and their sponsors' customers. That would be it for the employee although obviously not the organisation.
 

The OD

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
12,353
Leviticus says ''being gay'' is wrong although that is very much open to interpretation.

Leviticus also says tattooing your skin is wrong. Yet Israel is covered in them.

Israel Folau, by omitting this point and other rather bizarre utterances from Leviticus show that he does have intent with his tweets.

That intent appears to be to have a go at gay people. The only part of the Bible that references, in an extremely vague way actual homosexuality (there are mentions of sodomy in Genesis but that is also quite vague), is Leviticus yet he himself has shown that he cherry picks what he wants from it and ignores the rest.

So he can fúck right off with his freedom of religion BS, like the evangelicals in the US and elsewhere.
 

The OD

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
12,353
Ah yes the "tolerance" of the trendy left.
50% correct: I have no tolerance for lying shit bags who pick and choose a shield of religious freedoms or freedom of speech to hide their true feelings.

50% Wrong: I have some 'left' leanings, I have some 'right' leanings and on a lot of issues I take a libertarian stance. In the real world, very few people are completely one thing or another.

In the real world.
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
34,510
50% correct: I have no tolerance for lying shit bags who pick and choose a shield of religious freedoms or freedom of speech to hide their true feelings.

50% Wrong: I have some 'left' leanings, I have some 'right' leanings and on a lot of issues I take a libertarian stance. In the real world, very few people are completely one thing or another.

In the real world.

You do in your hole. If you were a libertarian you'd be defending Izzy Folau.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom