[RWC2023] Australia vs Fiji (17/09/2023)

[Leonormous Boozer]

3. Sharing beliefs publicly is 100% a human right, it's called freedom of expression. And includes 'freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers'

Article 19 is very explicit about this.

Nothing offers indemnity from repercussions from sharing those beliefs though.

The rest of your post was mostly irrelevant filler justifying damaging beliefs. Secular LGBT individuals won't really be affected by Folau's message, children and young adults from Tongan backgrounds in Australia whose families support him on the other hand.

 

[Which Tyler]

1. Yes, you can claim anything - but that doesn't make it justified.
2. No, because there's no such place. If it did though, then yes.
3. Yes, sharing your belief is a human right. That doesn't absolve anyone of the consequences of sharing their belief.
4. No, of coursed not, famous people are famous, non-famous people are non-famous.
5. I'm blatantly not.

Congratulations on holding round tables with homeless LGBT youths. Your experience is not universal.

Oh, and feel free to be angry at me - that is your human right, just as I have the right to anger you (and you have the right to anger me, and I have the right to be angered by you).
My employer also has the right to see my post condemning biggotry and to sanction me accordingly.
Equally, TRF is under no obligation to host my opinion, and has every right to remove my posts, and to ban me, if I've broken the terms of use for this website.
Neither of those sanctions affect my human rights to have, or to express my opinion.

And let me fully clear here, just in case there's any doubt - Folau is a disgraceful biggot, and his biggotry makes him FAR more deserving of burning in hell for all eternity (should I be wrong, and such a place actually exists) than any LGBT person does for being LGBT (presumably as Folau's god made them be).

 

[dirty harry]

Nothing offers indemnity from repercussions from sharing those beliefs though.

The rest of your post was mostly irrelevant filler justifying damaging beliefs. Secular LGBT individuals won't really be affected by Folau's message, children and young adults from Tongan backgrounds in Australia whose families support him on the other hand.

Justifying?

Please quote where I have done anything but mock those beliefs?

 

[dirty harry]

1. Yes, you can claim anything - but that doesn't make it justified.
2. No, because there's no such place. If it did though, then yes.
3. Yes, sharing your belief is a human right. That doesn't absolve anyone of the consequences of sharing their belief.
4. No, of coursed not, famous people are famous, non-famous people are non-famous.
5. I'm blatantly not.

Congratulations on holding round tables with homeless LGBT youths. Your experience is not universal.

Oh, and feel free to be angry at me - that is your human right, just as I have the right to anger you (and you have the right to anger me, and I have the right to be angered by you).
My employer also has the right to see my post condemning biggotry and to sanction me accordingly.
Equally, TRF is under no obligation to host my opinion, and has every right to remove my posts, and to ban me, if I've broken the terms of use for this website.
Neither of those sanctions affect my human rights to have, or to express my opinion.

And let me fully clear here, just in case there's any doubt - Folau is a disgraceful biggot, and his biggotry makes him FAR more deserving of burning in hell for all eternity (should I be wrong, and such a place actually exists) than any LGBT person does for being LGBT (presumably as Folau's god made them be).

The big difference being that TRF isnt protected by human rights law, and your employment is.

This is why Rugby Aus payed compensation to Folau in the amount of 3-4 million dollars. So no, your employer can not sanction you on protected grounds lol

You can be as triggered as you like, the majority of the world has anti LGBT views, mostly for religious reasons.

I have recently sat in training delivered by Stonewall and Kaleidescope project regarding sensitivity toward religious views on LGBT issues... and i bet you cant guess the one religion used as an example!

You may call him a biggot, most hypocrites do, but you have to recognise your ignorance when making that statement. As I said, having met him advocating for LGBT issues, and hearing his views on LGBT people, I find it hard to hear people who have never met him demonize him based on his religious beliefs, which by the way is the definition of biggotry.

I can disagree with most of his religious beliefs, but I can advocate for him to be allowed them, the alternative is devastating for those you proportion to defend!

 

[Jimbo]

ETA: As for "human rights" - are you saying that he has the right to say (whilst no-one's denying his right to say) that homosexuals (and others) should go to hell to burn for all eternity; but anyone who disagrees doesn't have the right to say that they disagree?

I am not religious in the slightest, but I do think miss quoting what is actually being said is part of the problem, (as far as I am aware and will happily stand corrected with evidence) it was more along the lines that according to his belief's those that follow a certain path would end up in hell, as a warning to repent, he isn't actively willing or wishing it upon anyone and probably thinks he is helping people as is his firm belief, the two things are quite different and personally I don't agree with either just think it's important messages are not tweaked.