RugbyRebels

Does Folau play on the sabbath?

morepork wrote:If you boys want to see how dangerous the actions of people of faith against minorities can get, pop on over the Atlantic and check it out. It's screaming, angry, in your face outright hate, and it is pushed hard using social media. If prominent sports people are unable to see their role in the trajectory of this when they choose to make these statements on social media, then they are part of the problem. Sorry.

It's only in a pocket of northern europe that people even give a shit about any of this stuff. Going south or east of there is death. Nobody even gives a shit as long as they make money.

Digby wrote:Does Folau play on the sabbath?

Israel's God doesn't mind so much about that rules. He just gets really upset about rules for putting gender on birth certificates.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Does Folau play on the sabbath?

Israel's God doesn't mind so much about that rules. He just gets really upset about rules for putting gender on birth certificates.

Puja

Aren't people marking a sex rather than a gender on a birth certificate, okay gender informs as to societal roles additional to being a linguistic determinant, but surely we're not putting gender on birth certificates?

I think it's more that people aren't - which is what he's upset about isn't it? That people aren't determining gender on birth certificates, and that it's therefore open to change later on.

Again I'm not sure what gender has to do with a birth certificate, surely it's sex not gender.

Billy and Izzy are as free to hold their religious beliefs regarding sexuality as the Dutch Reformed Church was welcome to its beliefs regarding race. For those of you too young to remember, this mainstream church fully supported the apartheid regime, which would have excluded both these players from any tours their nations made to South Africa at that time (barring perhaps any "honourary whites" type policy as was applied to Pacific and Maori players in the 1970 and 1976 All Blacks).

The last Wallabies tour under apartheid was in 1969 and excluded any players of colour. England's, shamefully, was in 1984 although I don't think the issue of players' race would have caused much difficulty for the RFU in those days. The RFU had had a de facto "whites only" policy of its own since Jimmy "Darkie"* Peters (capped 1906-1908) switched to league (even then, they didn't select Peters to play the tests against the 1906-7 Springbok tourists, who had complained about having to face a coloured played when they met his county, Devon).

*That was what they actually called him. Because of course they did. Citation: http://www.espnscrum.com/england/rugby/player/1812.html

Brilliant. Bristol celebrated victory over Saracens by playing It’s Raining Men over the PA system at the end of the match.

Timbo wrote:I feel that the intricacies of this issue are a little above my pay grade, but I thought Dan Leo made a good point; (paraphrasing) it’s not that long ago that fundamentalist Christianity was brought to places like Tonga by white, English speaking imperialists, usually under pain of torture and/or death.

Now it suits us, and let’s not forget gay rights and equality is a pretty new concept even in British/Western society (Ireland only recently allowed gay marriage for eg), we’re not even willing to open up a proper dialogue about these subjects- it’s straight to ridicule, ‘these guys are bigots’ and let’s sack them asap.

Doesn’t particularly sit right with me.

I just had a wee look at his twitter and his main point seems to be that its ironic that the Anglosphere is berating Pacific Islanders for a social attitude that they imported there in the first place, not that this makes holding said values alright. To quote from some of his interactions following that tweet:

"Not condoning. Just saying it’s ironic... colonisation of the mind took centuries. Decolonizing will also take time."

"Agree, let’s just hope for everyone’s sake mindsets change sooner rather than later!"



Now, that aside, what dialogues are there to be had?

The dialogue in which it's made clear to all professional rugby players that their continuing employment depends not only on their ability, but also not embarrassing their employers? I don't really see what dialogue there is to be had there. Any player that fails to have realised that this is the case is simply too stupid to have a dialogue with - its in their contracts, its in previous high-profile cases where players lost their jobs, its in all of society's mores, and it will have been in the meeting the ARU previously had with Folau over this.

The dialogue where, in general, the liberal Anglosphere persuades all the places it colonised that the values we taught them are no longer right and that we have nice shiny new values? That dialogue does need to exist tbf, and it is as much above my head as yours, and I think its mostly above rugby's head as a whole... but I don't see why rugby should let that get in the way of the cases of individual discipline.

And, nasty as it is, ridicule does usually have a place in these sorts of dialogues tbh.

Peat wrote:

Timbo wrote:I feel that the intricacies of this issue are a little above my pay grade, but I thought Dan Leo made a good point; (paraphrasing) it’s not that long ago that fundamentalist Christianity was brought to places like Tonga by white, English speaking imperialists, usually under pain of torture and/or death.

Now it suits us, and let’s not forget gay rights and equality is a pretty new concept even in British/Western society (Ireland only recently allowed gay marriage for eg), we’re not even willing to open up a proper dialogue about these subjects- it’s straight to ridicule, ‘these guys are bigots’ and let’s sack them asap.

Doesn’t particularly sit right with me.

I just had a wee look at his twitter and his main point seems to be that its ironic that the Anglosphere is berating Pacific Islanders for a social attitude that they imported there in the first place, not that this makes holding said values alright. To quote from some of his interactions following that tweet:

"Not condoning. Just saying it’s ironic... colonisation of the mind took centuries. Decolonizing will also take time."

"Agree, let’s just hope for everyone’s sake mindsets change sooner rather than later!"



Now, that aside, what dialogues are there to be had?

The dialogue in which it's made clear to all professional rugby players that their continuing employment depends not only on their ability, but also not embarrassing their employers? I don't really see what dialogue there is to be had there. Any player that fails to have realised that this is the case is simply too stupid to have a dialogue with - its in their contracts, its in previous high-profile cases where players lost their jobs, its in all of society's mores, and it will have been in the meeting the ARU previously had with Folau over this.

The dialogue where, in general, the liberal Anglosphere persuades all the places it colonised that the values we taught them are no longer right and that we have nice shiny new values? That dialogue does need to exist tbf, and it is as much above my head as yours, and I think its mostly above rugby's head as a whole... but I don't see why rugby should let that get in the way of the cases of individual discipline.

And, nasty as it is, ridicule does usually have a place in these sorts of dialogues tbh.

TBH, a large chunk of the homophobia around the world was exported by the British in Victorian times. Places like India especially didn't care about sexuality pre-colonisation and didn't have any stigmas based on who you fancied - it was our laws that criminalised it and our leadership that inculcated the idea of it being sinful and dirty. Same with the likes of Uganda, Malaysia, etc.

Puja

He blames the omniscient space being rather than take responsibility. He is a lost cause:

“It’s obviously a decision that’s in the process right now but I believe in a God that’s in control of all things,” he said, having attended a Sunday service at his local church. “Whatever his will is, whether that’s to continue playing or not, I’m more than happy to do what he wants me to do.

“In Ezekiel, chapter 33, verse 11, it says, that ‘God has no pleasure in the person that’s living in sin,’” Folau told the Herald. “He’s a loving God and he wants people to turn away from what they’re living in and he’ll give them life. That’s the message I’m trying to share, even though it comes across as harsh. I can’t change what the word of God says.

“In Ezekiel, chapter 33, verse 11, it says, that ‘God has no pleasure in the person that’s living in sin,’” Folau told the Herald. “He’s a loving God and he wants people to turn away from what they’re living in and he’ll give them life. That’s the message I’m trying to share, even though it comes across as harsh. I can’t change what the word of God says.

Then go be a f*cking preacher.

Puja

morepork wrote:He blames the omniscient space being rather than take responsibility. He is a lost cause:

“It’s obviously a decision that’s in the process right now but I believe in a God that’s in control of all things,” he said, having attended a Sunday service at his local church. “Whatever his will is, whether that’s to continue playing or not, I’m more than happy to do what he wants me to do.

“In Ezekiel, chapter 33, verse 11, it says, that ‘God has no pleasure in the person that’s living in sin,’” Folau told the Herald. “He’s a loving God and he wants people to turn away from what they’re living in and he’ll give them life. That’s the message I’m trying to share, even though it comes across as harsh. I can’t change what the word of God says.

Wow. What a total load of bollocks that is. I actually pity these people, who are either brain washed, stupid or both

Puja wrote:

“In Ezekiel, chapter 33, verse 11, it says, that ‘God has no pleasure in the person that’s living in sin,’” Folau told the Herald. “He’s a loving God and he wants people to turn away from what they’re living in and he’ll give them life. That’s the message I’m trying to share, even though it comes across as harsh. I can’t change what the word of God says.

Then go be a f*cking preacher.

Puja

The church already has too many of them, especially when it comes to the children

Good to hear a blast of Ezekiel. Ezekiel 23 v 20 is a classic - not sure how Israel F compares to: "lovers with pr*cks like donkeys and ejaculations like horses". I enjoyed Mark Steyn's comment on Folau's post: ("WARNING Drunks Homosexuals Adulterers Liars Fornicators Thieves Atheists Idolaters - HELL AWAITS YOU")
Mark writes: "Those are very broad categories, encompassing (from my personal observation) almost everyone in Australia." (https://www.steynonline.com/9304/the-gay-blade )

Well the Wallabies w/o Folau look easier for us in the WC QFs. "God moves in mysterious ways, etc".

Sarries warn Billy, this will get still more problematic if Billy’s mum warns him not to go quiet in commenting on the Lord's values

This is all Britain’s fault. It was the power that insisted on sending Victorian Protestant missionaries to the South Pacific to undermine local culture as part of the colonisation process. If that hadn’t happened, you wouldn’t now have Pacific cultures with fundamentalist christian “values.”

It’s also fortunate that most discussion of the “values” of the Dutch Reformed Church would be in Afrikaans so we don’t hear about it (hint: this mainstream Protestant church openly supported apartheid until the end of the 1980s)

Lizard Minto wades in casting his wide net.

I’m on good ground about the origins of the general devoutness of the Pacific Islands. There’s also some very interesting research on pre-colonial sexuality and gender identity in those places.

Basically, the colonial tool kit was bibles, balls and bras.

The weakness in my point is that absent wowserish colonial religiosity, and the need for an alternative outlet for male energies, rugby might not have been the draw card that it is now in the Pacific.

I can't say I follow what Minto has to do with this, there are two people called Minto I can think of, there's David who would be a very harsh comparison as a rage/lust driven murderer, and Scott who plays football, which is more discussion on football than these pages warrant but also all I know about Scott

John Minto was a leader of the anti-Springbok tour movement in New Zealand in 1980-81. Although he has been proven to be on the right side of history for that, he has since gathered a bit of loony-lefty reputation for other political stands.

Some sage like wisdom from this chap.


https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/11 ... ing-attack


"Why's everyone so worried about what Israel Folau said," Hopoate wrote in a scathing homophobic post.

"All these idiots carrying on like he's murdered someone. If your (sic) a bloody HOMO who cares, I've been called racist names and all other crap all my life and if you can't handle been told your (sic) going to hell we'll toughen the F up cause no 1 cares if you do or if you don't.

"But 1 thing I can say is GOD MADE ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE."

Hopoate also left a number of provocative hashtags in his post, saying: "#AustralianRugbyAreMuts #IfTheBossOfTheMajorSponsorIsAHomo #LookForAnotherSponsor #SpeakWhatYouBelieveNotWhatOthersWantYouToSay".


The 45-year-old former Manly and West Tigers player is infamous for the "bum poking" saga in 2001, when he he was suspended for 12 weeks for inserting his finger into the backsides of three opponents.

His son, William, plays for the Bulldogs and recently revealed how the "Hoppa" tackle clouded his childhood, but said it was "supposed to be a prank to watch in team video sessions" but "ended up costing him his personal brand for life".

Hopoate's support for Folau comes on the same day leading rugby union referee Nigel Owens slammed the comments as "very hurtful".

A walking homophobic cliche known mainly for sticking his finger up another man's arse during a tackle.

Are we beginning to see the depth and ferocity of this irrational homophobia now internet free speech warriors?

I am and I’m loving how stupid they are making themselves look.
Also, you live on a country with a god fearing white supremacist as President. You better hope he doesn’t start to crack down on internet free speech because he won’t be cracking down on the stuff you want him to.

My friend, there is looking stupid, and then there is motivation to get out among real people and cause harm. The latter is the more acute issue. An opinionated contribution to dialogue needn't promote bigotry or hate.

I do indeed live in a country run by a faux god fearing orange white supremacist, and I would rather sensible rules of safety be applied objectively (note: not "cracking down") across the board given that literally hundreds of people are shot dead every year due to increasingly hateful unsubstantiated rhetoric spewed out across the ether. Note also that the executive branch of government here is distinct from the legislative branch and is unable to actually make laws independently, despite the executive head being angrily confused by this structure.