Izzy Folau

[Bill]

Someone has to stand up for minorities and the oppressed, because they cannot do that for themselves... they're outnumbered.

http://theconversation.com/alan-tur...ecuted-by-whitehall-for-their-sexuality-58018

Minority groups are outnumbered by Israel Folau ???

Well thank the lord you're here to stand up for them all and give all those billions of Folaus and their hate ridden tweets a damn good bashing on behalf of the defenceless and incapable minority groups !

Who needs Superman !!

 

[Bill]

blah blah blah
Same could be said if Folau didn't use a public platform to say what he said. If he kept it within a small community, then I bet this would have been a non-issue. But he didn't and now those against him use the same stage to oppose.

????????????????? You think that instead of re-tweeting the image, he should have called a small community meeting to show it around instead ?? wtf ???? mental.

Did you read all my remarks on this thread???

Unfortunately.

So what does this mean? You don't have a point to raise on this? Or don't know enough to comment?

It means it was an interesting comment, as I said.

 

[Bill]

Don't conflate being a drunk with being an alcoholic, they are not the same thing; there are alcoholics who are not drunks, and there are drunks who are not alcoholics. Being an alcoholic something you cannot do anything about, being a drunk is a choice, one that you make by not recognizing what you are. Alcoholism is treatable, being homosexual is NOT!

You're sounding a bit like Folau now !

 

[ncurd]

Don't conflate being a drunk with being an alcoholic, they are not the same thing; there are alcoholics who are not drunks, and there are drunks who are not alcoholics. Being an alcoholic something you cannot do anything about, being a drunk is a choice, one that you make by not recognizing what you are. Alcoholism is treatable, being homosexual is NOT!

I think you misunderstand me if you think I think homosexuality can be cured or would ever use that language. I was merely stating the only difference between the two.

On the other stuff you are flat out wrong if you are an alcoholic being drunk is rarely if ever a choice. That's the nature of addiction it's a lack of control. On that article sorry but its utter ******** and just the crap alcoholics tell themselves in that denial. My mother lost her life due to that denial and refused to listen to me or my sister for over 15 years, my father still believes in that denial (luckily he is trying to make steps to improve his health but is still drinking way too much). So yeah that articles horseshit.

 

[BobbyM]

I'll say it again;

Drinking to excess, having sex (out of wedlock and to another while married), lying, stealing and believing in another god or none are all fundamentally choices for a "well" person (I.e. someone who is not suffering from an addiction or mental health problem). Homosexuality is a state of being.

Homosexuals are a protected minority by law in Australia. By targeting a protected group for who they are, Folau is in no way the victim. He was the instigator of the attack when he decided to post to his over 350k Instagram followers.

 

[Bill]

I'll say it again;

Drinking to excess, having sex (out of wedlock and to another while married), lying, stealing and believing in another god or none are all fundamentally choices for a "well" person (I.e. someone who is not suffering from an addiction or mental health problem). Homosexuality is a state of being.

Homosexuals are a protected minority by law in Australia. By targeting a protected group for who they are, Folau is in no way the victim. He was the instigator of the attack when he decided to post to his over 350k Instagram followers.

Not sure whether I agree that he instigated an "attack" on anyway, but not really interested in arguing the point.

With regards to him being a victim, my point was that he is a victim of his beliefs.

I don't know what the bible says about homosexuality, but unless Folau's badly got the wrong end of the stick, it doesn't sound like it's glowing about it, in which case why is the bible still allowed to be published and distributed in Australia ?

It's all very well and good ganging up on a bloke, but all he's done is parrot what he's been told by his religion. If there's anger to be vented, it should be against the religion, not against an individual who follows it. That's my point. As I say though, as is often the case with these things, in all likelihood few people who would have been personally offended by the tweet would have even known about it but for the furore about it. Seeing as he has (I understand) previously criticised homosexuality, I wouldn't have thought many gay people followed him, or cared a damn what he says or thinks for that matter.

Btw, (and off the topic of arguing about this matter) I suggest it's not a great idea to pontificate on subjects someone else has just expressed an arguably contrary view on, whilst talking about the death of one of their parents.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Minority groups are outnumbered by Israel Folau ???

Well thank the lord you're here to stand up for them all and give all those billions of Folaus and their hate ridden tweets a damn good bashing on behalf of the defenceless and incapable minority groups !

Who needs Superman !!

Homosexuals are outnumbered by religious conservatives and generally homophobic individual yes and have only really had any sort of recognition and acceptance in society in the last few decades. Even now there is a sizeable chunk who don't recognise them. Had nobody in the majority stood up for them, they would still be persecuted.

You're sounding a bit like Folau now !

No he isn't. Alcoholism is a state of being as it is a physiological need for alcohol. A alcoholic doesn't want alcohol, to them they feel they need it in the same way someone feels they need food when hungry. This can be controlled and eventually reduced but it will always be there.

Homosexuality is also just a state of being, it's not a choice. The choice is to act upon that and have relations with another man. In modern society the "hate the sin, love the sinner" defence is considered extremely flimsy and a homosexual should be free to express their attraction the same as anyone else.

It's clear from your comments you are being wilfully dense though.

Not sure whether I agree that he instigated an "attack" on anyway, but not really interested in arguing the point.

With regards to him being a victim, my point was that he is a victim of his beliefs.

I don't know what the bible says about homosexuality, but unless Folau's badly got the wrong end of the stick, it doesn't sound like it's glowing about it, in which case why is the bible still allowed to be published and distributed in Australia ?

It's all very well and good ganging up on a bloke, but all he's done is parrot what he's been told by his religion. If there's anger to be vented, it should be against the religion, not against an individual who follows it. That's my point. As I say though, as is often the case with these things, in all likelihood few people who would have been personally offended by the tweet would have even known about it but for the furore about it. Seeing as he has (I understand) previously criticised homosexuality, I wouldn't have thought many gay people followed him, or cared a damn what he says or thinks for that matter.

Btw, (and off the topic of arguing about this matter) I suggest it's not a great idea to pontificate on subjects someone else has just expressed an arguably contrary view on, whilst talking about the death of one of their parents.

You are essentially saying Folau can't be held accountable for his own thoughts, that's clearly ridiculous. It's not just him being targeted, that part of his faith is also criticised. Merely parroting something is no a defence against using your own brain and your own judgement. Indoctrination provides an explanation for why someone may be a certain way but this isn't the same as making it acceptable. I've known people with learning difficulties who were extremely rude. The fact that they had difficulties didn't excuse the rudeness and they would still get told off for it the same as anyone else.

I don't follow ISIS on social media, by your argument then them calling for my death is a-ok and shouldn't bother me...

 

[BobbyM]

Btw, (and off the topic of arguing about this matter) I suggest it's not a great idea to pontificate on subjects someone else has just expressed an arguably contrary view on, whilst talking about the death of one of their parents.

Eh? If you had cared to read through the thread you would realise that others have lost immediate family members due to addiction, namely me. I was extremely careful to differentiate between the two situations (homosexuality and addiction).

 

[BobbyM]

Not sure whether I agree that he instigated an "attack" on anyway, but not really interested in arguing the point.

With regards to him being a victim, my point was that he is a victim of his beliefs.

I don't know what the bible says about homosexuality, but unless Folau's badly got the wrong end of the stick, it doesn't sound like it's glowing about it, in which case why is the bible still allowed to be published and distributed in Australia ?

It's all very well and good ganging up on a bloke, but all he's done is parrot what he's been told by his religion. If there's anger to be vented, it should be against the religion, not against an individual who follows it. That's my point. As I say though, as is often the case with these things, in all likelihood few people who would have been personally offended by the tweet would have even known about it but for the furore about it. Seeing as he has (I understand) previously criticised homosexuality, I wouldn't have thought many gay people followed him, or cared a damn what he says or thinks for that matter.

Onto the main thrust of your comments; Folau owns his beliefs. Whether they be homophobic, racist or sexist, and whether they're based on his interpretation of a book, a movie, or his upbringing, he consciously chooses to believe what he does.

I'm also happy to say that some of the views his "religion" appears to hold are not particularly pleasant, and criticise any preacher if they preach what Folau posted.

I feel that your points about offence is a red herring.
He previously posted to his over 350k followers on a public forum his homophobic comments. This was a breach of the code of conduct. He was warned formally by RA. He did it again, another breach of the code of conduct, and his contract was terminated. Nothing to do with whether a person found his comments offensive or not. Indeed, there has barely been a mention of offence in this thread, not sure why you're brought it up?

 

[Bill]

Eh? If you had cared to read through the thread you would realise that others have lost immediate family members due to addiction, namely me. I was extremely careful to differentiate between the two situations (homosexuality and addiction).

Yes, I read your comment above. Obviously sincerely very sorry to hear about the matters and personal tragedies that have hit your family so hard. I would hope above all else in this discussion that neither I nor anyone else have made comments which you found personally unpalatable or objectionable bearing in mind the events which you describe, and I sincerely apologise if for any reason that was inadvertently the case.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Complete and utter bollocks! You have no idea what you are talking about?

Your appalling reading comprehension is your problem, not mine. please try to keep up.

Again I ask, where have I personally said that I'm a homophobe????

My church says that it's wrong and won't condone it at church.

But we don't turn people who are homosexual away from the church. Same goes for murderers, rapists, adulterers, and any other wrong/improper act.

They are more than welcome to attend church and be part of the congregation. The only way they won't be allowed is if they are under church disciplinary action. And that is when they do something in church or on church grounds and it's something like stealing church money, doing something improper at church, exposing themselves by form of nudity to others in the congregation.

But we don't turn people away just because they're gay.

So please try and make a better effort.

You dodged my question so i ask again. To the best of your understanding, does the religion you believe in preach that unrepenting homosexual go to hell? Yes or no.
It's quite telling when a man of faith cant answer a straight question, innit?

My church says that it's wrong and won't condone it at church.

But we don't turn people who are homosexual away from the church. Same goes for murderers, rapists, adulterers, and any other wrong/improper act.

So when you are inside the church you get told that homosexuals = rapists and murders.
Got it.

 

[Bill]

Rather than respond to the others comments above, I'll just set out a composite summary of what I think my view on the matter is.

Before I do, I'll quickly reprise the facts as I understand them.

THE FACTS.
1. Folau tweeted or retweeted an image which advised various 'groups' of people that they need to repent for their sins in order to be saved by Jesus, and to avoid going to hell. One of the 'groups' was people that he described as "homosexuals".
2. The tweet was criticised, and it became a scandal.
3. The Australian rugby union terminated his employment.

MY TAKE ON IT.
1. As a public figure, as a role model and as an employee, I think that Folau was wrong to post or repost the tweet. Any high profile professional should know that they are a representative of their organisation and that they shouldn't do anything which brings controversy or negative publicity to their employer.
2. I don't know what the contract says, but I don't consider it unreasonable in the circumstances for the employer to sack him.
3. That said I would have been equally happy with people letting it go and just leaving him to blabber on and get ignored and/or laughed at for his views.
4. I don't really see that it's anyone else's business. The guy has made a mistake, and he's been sacked. I don't buy the argument that homosexuals are a minority and need a load of rugger types to stick up for them and stick the oar into Folau on the internet. There is only one Folau, and homosexuals are quite capable of standing up for themselves against him should they feel the need to. The idea of 10,000 internet bashers v Folau does not strike me as a particularly gallant fight in any case.
5. In my opinion, the best thing people can do generally in these type of situations if they really want to get involved is to offer support to ALL of those who may be affected, rather than picking out a bad guy and going wading in with their pitch forks, and to flush out and burn at the stake any other religious types and the like.
6. In my opinion, Folau was likely doing what he thought was right in the name of the religion which he has been brainwashed by. The best course of action I believe would be to try to rehabilitate him and others with similar views, rather than getting angry, and also to consider what approach should be taken to addressing religious 'intolerance' 'ignorance' ? in general, and to bringing it into line with society's wider contemporary views.
7. I find it odd that noone is criticising the bible.

I recognise that other people are entitled to hold, and do hold, other views. Thanks

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Why are people so adamant on excusing bigotry?
It's mental

I think you are misreading things, terribly so.

I've said quite a few times i think folau is nothing short of an imbecile on this thread and i am not excusing his idiocy. What i am adamantly defending, not excusing, are his rights given the applicable laws. To my understanding, he has the right to do what he did.
If the courts there rule otherwise i'll stand corrected. That's a non issue. I have an understanding, if the relevant authorities say my understanding is wrong i have no problem correcting my views.
Having said that, I'd be nice to see the ones arguing against me, yourself included, to do the same.

When u dont like the laws, you change the laws, you dont go out cherry picking what's convenient.

 

[Bill]

The only way they won't be allowed is if they are under church disciplinary action. And that is when they do something in church or on church grounds and it's something like stealing church money, doing something improper at church, exposing themselves by form of nudity to others in the congretation

????
Are the homosexual members of the congretation more likely to have breached these rules than the heterosexual members ?

 

[TRF_heineken]

Your appalling reading comprehension is your problem, not mine. please try to keep up.


You dodged my question so i ask again. To the best of your understanding, does the religion you believe in preach that unrepenting homosexual go to hell? Yes or no.
It's quite telling when a man of faith cant answer a straight question, innit?


So when you are inside the church you get told that homosexuals = rapists and murders.
Got it.

Ugh! It's like talking to a brick!

I didn't dodge your question, and you still haven't got the gist of what I'm saying.

It's not up to me or the church or any congregant or reverand or priest or administrator to say who goes to hell, and who doesn't. Only God decides that.

What we believe is that any wrong act big or small, COULD be the cause that you MIGHT, go to hell, or at least not go to heaven. But being repentant, doing good deeds, love thy neighbour, and remaining a christian, WOULD be ways to prevent that from happening. But only God decides.

And also stop trying to draw stupid comparisons. Read the scripture lines and you will see that Thieves, homosexuals, rapists, murderers, adulterers etc. are all mentioned in the same paragraph.

????
Are the homosexual members of the congretation more likely to have breached these rules than the heterosexual members ?

No. Because in the 34 years I've been on this earth, I've only seen or heard of 3 instances where a person was placed under Church disciplinary.

1. One of the reverand's in another town in Limpopo had an affair with one of the congregant's in the church hall. And was caught out. He was put on disciplinary ban for 2 years for that, and when he and his wife divorced due to this, he was also removed as a reverand of the church.

2. The woman mentioned in 1 was placed under disciplinary ban along with the reverand. after the ban expired she returned to church.

3. A member of my grandfather's congregation caused the death of another churchgoer. and he was found guilty of culpable homicide. He got a 5 year ban, but he was in prison for 8 years. I still see him every Sunday at Mass.

In our church I know of 4 homosexuals. I'm friends with 3 of them. 2 of them are married to one another. They didn't get married at our church, and haven't done anything at church to cause any alarm bells to go off, even the most conservative of the congregation hasn't had any issues with them.

 

[smartcooky]

Minority groups are outnumbered by Israel Folau ???

That is a strawman argument if ever I saw one. Try not to be an idiot when you're making up stuff to support your argument

I was going to write a blistering answer, but then I saw ragerancher's reply, and it said everything I would have wanted to say

 

[Bill]

That is a strawman argument if ever I saw one. Try not to be an idiot when you're making up stuff to support your argument

I was going to write a blistering answer, but then I saw ragerancher's reply, and it said everything I would have wanted to say

a blistering answer !!!!! LMFAO

What a ******* prick.

 

[Bill]

1. One of the reverand's in another town in Limpopo had an affair with one of the congregant's in the church hall. And was caught out. He was put on disciplinary ban for 2 years for that, and when he and his wife divorced due to this, he was also removed as a reverand of the church.

2. The woman mentioned in 1 was placed under disciplinary ban along with the reverand. after the ban expired she returned to church.

3. A member of my grandfather's congregation caused the death of another churchgoer. and he was found guilty of culpable homicide. He got a 5 year ban, but he was in prison for 8 years. I still see him every Sunday at Mass.

In our church I know of 4 homosexuals. I'm friends with 3 of them. 2 of them are married to one another. They didn't get married at our church, and haven't done anything at church to cause any alarm bells to go off, even the most conservative of the congregation hasn't had any issues with them.

!!!

OK, well fair enough ! Thanks for your answer, and for the stories. It sounds like it needs a mini series !

 

[Bill]

That is a strawman argument if ever I saw one. Try not to be an idiot when you're making up stuff to support your argument

I was going to write a blistering answer, but then I saw ragerancher's reply, and it said everything I would have wanted to say

My reply was deleted. No point repeating, but I laughed at you - amongst other things - for your ridiculous comment about making a blistering answer.

very difficult not to repeat the language I used about you previously, but obviously doing so would be a waste of time.

anyway, bye !

 

[smartcooky]

Rather than respond to the others comments above, I'll just set out a composite summary of what I think my view on the matter is.

Before I do, I'll quickly reprise the facts as I understand them.

THE FACTS.
1. Folau tweeted or retweeted an image which advised various 'groups' of people that they need to repent for their sins in order to be saved by Jesus, and to avoid going to hell. One of the 'groups' was people that he described as "homosexuals".
2. The tweet was criticised, and it became a scandal.
3. The Australian rugby union terminated his employment.

You left out quite a large number of facts, let me fix that for you (in red)

1. In 2018 in breach of the Code of Conduct of Rugby Australia (RA), Folau posted on his Instagram account about God's plan for him. He replied to a question by mike_sephton "@izzyfolau What is gods plan for Gays?" Folau replied "HELL...Unless they repent of their sins and turn to God."

2. This conversation was picked up by twitter followers, and retweeted many times, at which point mainstream media picked it up, leading to it coming to the attention of RA.

3. After a three week delay in which RA sat on their hands, they warned Folau that his comments ran counter to RA's policy of inclusiveness, and was a direct violation of RA's Code of Conduct.

4. After he was warned, over the next 12 months, Folau posted a further 52 times to his Instagram account, 43 of which were posts of a religious nature, some of which pushed the boundaries of RA's patience

5. Finally, in 2019 Folau tweeted or retweeted posted an image on his Instagram account which advised various 'groups' of people that they need to repent for their sins in order to be saved by Jesus, and to avoid going to hell. One of the 'groups' was people that he described as "homosexuals".

6. The tweet was criticised, and it became a scandal.

7. The Australian rugby union terminated his employment.


NOTE: It's Item 4 above that is going scupper any chance that Folau can successfully clam his religious freedom was interfered with.