RugbyRebels

Don’t get me wrong. I’d love it if idiots like him were silenced, I just think allowing him to spout his bollox is the lesser of two evils.
I don’t follow US politics to know who controls what, despite the Trump thread being the busiest on here, weirdly. However, IMO, the point still stands. Limiting free speech is great if it’s being limited by someone you agree with, it’s not so great when it’s being limited by somebody you disagree with. I just believe censorship is a dangerous path to start down as, in the wrong hands, it can be used for all the wrong reasons.
Finally, and then I must actually do some work, and I’ve said this earlier in the thread, if he does start inciting violence, and for me being sent to a fictional place falls a long way short, he should be censored and censured. As he’s not, let him continue to make an idiot of himself, just without a job.

Mellsblue wrote:I am and I’m loving how stupid they are making themselves look.

The problem is that you think that they're making themselves look stupid, because you're an intelligent person who already knows they're wrong. For people who aren't clever, who don't have any knowledge about it, or already hold a similar opinion, they're not making themselves look stupid, but a person of authority speaking truth.

Mellsblue wrote:As he’s not, let him continue to make an idiot of himself, just without a job.

And that's the ideal solution - let people say what they want, but then they have to take the consequences and obloquy.

Puja

Mellsblue wrote:Don’t get me wrong. I’d love it if idiots like him were silenced, I just think allowing him to spout his bollox is the lesser of two evils.
I don’t follow US politics to know who controls what, despite the Trump thread being the busiest on here, weirdly. However, IMO, the point still stands. Limiting free speech is great if it’s being limited by someone you agree with, it’s not so great when it’s being limited by somebody you disagree with. I just believe censorship is a dangerous path to start down as, in the wrong hands, it can be used for all the wrong reasons.
Finally, and then I must actually do some work, and I’ve said this earlier in the thread, if he does start inciting violence, and for me being sent to a fictional place falls a long way short, he should be censored and censured. As he’s not, let him continue to make an idiot of himself, just without a job.

But how is he being censored? I don't understand? He's got a choice: he can make whatever comments he likes, but if he does he can lose his job.

That kinda applies to all of us, no?

I wouldn't censor anyone, but they have to understand that free speech is the freedom to say it, not the freedom to avoid the consequences of saying it.

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Don’t get me wrong. I’d love it if idiots like him were silenced, I just think allowing him to spout his bollox is the lesser of two evils.
I don’t follow US politics to know who controls what, despite the Trump thread being the busiest on here, weirdly. However, IMO, the point still stands. Limiting free speech is great if it’s being limited by someone you agree with, it’s not so great when it’s being limited by somebody you disagree with. I just believe censorship is a dangerous path to start down as, in the wrong hands, it can be used for all the wrong reasons.
Finally, and then I must actually do some work, and I’ve said this earlier in the thread, if he does start inciting violence, and for me being sent to a fictional place falls a long way short, he should be censored and censured. As he’s not, let him continue to make an idiot of himself, just without a job.

But how is he being censored? I don't understand? He's got a choice: he can make whatever comments he likes, but if he does he can lose his job.

That kinda applies to all of us, no?

I wouldn't censor anyone, but they have to understand that free speech is the freedom to say it, not the freedom to avoid the consequences of saying it.

No, he’s not being censored but some on here are advocating censorship.

I'm advocating regulation, not censorship. I'd lose my job if I said what these guys are putting online. Why are for-profit media platforms allowed to provide a conduit for a dangerously broad definition of free speech without impunity?

morepork wrote:I'm advocating regulation, not censorship. I'd lose my job if I said what these guys are putting online. Why are for-profit media platforms allowed to provide a conduit for a dangerously broad definition of free speech without impunity?

Interesting article by Matthew Syed in todays Times. "Irael Folau is a believer in the Great Commission. Born again at an Assemblies of God service in 2011, he was introduced to the idea that a prime responsibility of a Christian is to evangelise the world and, by implication, save the unconverted from damnation. As he put it in a newspaper column in 2015: “You see someone who is about to walk into a hole and have the chance to save him. He might be determined to maintain his course and doesn’t want to hear what you have to say. But if you don’t tell him the truth, as unpopular as it might be, he is going to fall into that hole. What do you do?”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/isra ... -ncs6jph2m (paywall)

Folau is breaking his contract with the ARU by pushing this agenda, but he feels its his mission. He'd be in the same spot with many employers,
"Leveraging an association with a sports team to further religious or political objectives is legitimate, but only within limits. Folau stepped beyond these limits consistently and deliberately. He was a serial violator of his employment contract." Folau is free to proselytise in his own time but his employer can dismiss him if he breaks contract or embarrasses them.

pace Lizard, "This is all Britain’s fault" - Folau is Pentecostal, not Methodist: the AoG started in the US I believe(?)

morepork wrote:I'm advocating regulation, not censorship. I'd lose my job if I said what these guys are putting online. Why are for-profit media platforms allowed to provide a conduit for a dangerously broad definition of free speech without impunity?

What does your regulation look like?

The difference between regulation and censorship is mostly semantic and if it doesn't look dangerously broad, it's probably nowhere near free speech.

Mellsblue wrote:

morepork wrote:I'm advocating regulation, not censorship. I'd lose my job if I said what these guys are putting online. Why are for-profit media platforms allowed to provide a conduit for a dangerously broad definition of free speech without impunity?

What does your regulation look like?

Similar to the one's that govern things like search committees, conferences, and supervision at work where I am not permitted to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation and such like. There are strict rules applicable to many aspects of my job regarding the use of social media that are founded in ethics and compliance. Why are Facebook and Instagram allowed to circumvent these? All it does is empower the disproportionate use of hate in lieu of informed debate. Labeling homosexuals as cursed and damned is wrong and not appropriate. Doing so when afforded the public platform that comes with sporting stardom is unconscionable. You can start by regulating the use of social media promoted by sportspeople for public consumption. Currently, trademark and copyright infringement has more legitimate avenues for airing grievance than do minorities, apparently. If social media platforms are to be allowed near unfettered access to meta data across all social strata with the astronomical financial benefits and political clout associated thereof, it is only fair that they absorb at least some responsibility for their content. We can put this off as too hard indefinitely, but this problem is only going to get worse.

morepork wrote:. We can put this off as too hard indefinitely, but this problem is only going to get worse.

And yet for all the problems there's probably never been a better time to be gay

Digby wrote:

morepork wrote:. We can put this off as too hard indefinitely, but this problem is only going to get worse.

And yet for all the problems there's probably never been a better time to be gay

It’s not a lifestyle choice or an investment niche bro. It is a fact of life impervious to cynicism.

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:

morepork wrote:. We can put this off as too hard indefinitely, but this problem is only going to get worse.

And yet for all the problems there's probably never been a better time to be gay

It’s not a lifestyle choice or an investment niche bro. It is a fact of life impervious to cynicism.

Whatever it is there's no need to suggest the problem is only getting worse when the situation has never been better

The acceptance of the situation, as you put it, is unduly influenced by the prominence of certain high profile individuals taking advantage of an unregulated platform accessed by billions to promote an incorrect interpretation of a fundamental facet of human nature to the detriment of what is correct, namely that homosexuals are a normal healthy part of society. If this platform is influential in the consolidation of this incorrect interpretation , then it is by definition a problem. Do you think the demonisation of vaccination, one of the most remarkable applications of biomedicine , is not a problem because there has never been better access to vaccines than ever before?

Here here morepork. If only everyone would understand this simple logic.

Black people have never had it so good either have they?

Digby wrote:

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:
And yet for all the problems there's probably never been a better time to be gay

It’s not a lifestyle choice or an investment niche bro. It is a fact of life impervious to cynicism.

Whatever it is there's no need to suggest the problem is only getting worse when the situation has never been better

Whilst the 'situation' might be about as tolerant as it has ever been, at the same time, the 'problem' is more easily amplified than ever before.

Digby wrote:

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:
And yet for all the problems there's probably never been a better time to be gay

It’s not a lifestyle choice or an investment niche bro. It is a fact of life impervious to cynicism.

Whatever it is there's no need to suggest the problem is only getting worse when the situation has never been better

In terms of overall health, maybe, but in terms of acceptance? There's been far more tolerant societies than our current one in the past.

Hooky wrote:Here here morepork. If only everyone would understand this simple logic.

Black people have never had it so good either have they?

You should subscribe to my “Being Welsh is inhumane “ blog.


Like me on Facebook.

Diggers isn’t saying it’s perfect or even good enough at present but that, if social media is such a threat to our liberal ways, why are we becoming more liberal and tolerant as a society as it becomes more prevalent.
A gay rugby writer on Haskell’s podcast says the reaction to Folau’s idiocy will have shown gay people that in fact Folau is in the minority. In fact, the whole podcast was about why what Folau believes is idiotic.
RUNY are holding an LGBT+ pride day at their next home game specifically in response to Folau. The owner has written an open letter to Folau telling him what a monumental prick he is.
Billy V was booed by his own fans and oppo fans on the weekend because of his support for Folau’s views whilst Bristol played Raining Men when the won.
Both the RFU and Sarries have released statements saying what Billy has written is wrong and unacceptable.
I’d say the whole episode has shown the LGBT+ society that the majority of the rugby community are very much on their side and if Folau wanted to save homosexuals his plan has very much backfired.

With glorious timing:



I hope someone tags Folau to offer him a ticket.

Mellsblue wrote:Diggers isn’t saying it’s perfect or even good enough at present but that, if social media is such a threat to our liberal ways, why are we becoming more liberal and tolerant as a society as it becomes more prevalent.
A gay rugby writer on Haskell’s podcast says the reaction to Folau’s idiocy will have shown gay people that in fact Folau is in the minority. In fact, the whole podcast was about why what Folau believes is idiotic.
RUNY are holding an LGBT+ pride day at their next home game specifically in response to Folau. The owner has written an open letter to Folau telling him what a monumental prick he is.
Billy V was booed by his own fans and oppo fans on the weekend because of his support for Folau’s views whilst Bristol played Raining Men when the won.
Both the RFU and Sarries have released statements saying what Billy has written is wrong and unacceptable.
I’d say the whole episode has shown the LGBT+ society that the majority of the rugby community are very much on their side and if Folau wanted to save homosexuals his plan has very much backfired.

Additionally the gays have totally dominated coverage of Folau, there's precious little time being granted to the other groups similarly condemned

One group that's being curiously overlooked as condemned to hell are all the Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and so on, none of them accept the cosmic Jewish zombie as being the way unto god so I assume at any rate they've got some problems coming

Raggs wrote:

Digby wrote:

morepork wrote: It’s not a lifestyle choice or an investment niche bro. It is a fact of life impervious to cynicism.

Whatever it is there's no need to suggest the problem is only getting worse when the situation has never been better

In terms of overall health, maybe, but in terms of acceptance? There's been far more tolerant societies than our current one in the past.

I've been seduced by globilisation and no longer think in terms of individual societies.

One thing I would observe comparing our modern world to societies existing thousands of years ago is we're much better placed to not really care about people's sexual preferences. I can understand why in small groups with limited communication the idea man shouldn't lie with man could easily stem from the thinking that if man didn’t lie with woman they could be looking at the end of their society. So whilst not accepting carte blanche from olden times all social norms perhaps it did represent the best thinking of the time. Sadly I have no useful thoughts on how ancient tomes of social doctrine can easily adapt tomodern standards, but people already ignore plenty in those religious tomes, even the religious folks, and there are shifts within the various churches too.

Mellsblue wrote:With glorious timing:



I hope someone tags Folau to offer him a ticket.

That just looks so wrong to me, if they're going to be cradling a rugby ball lose the tennis shirts and find some proper clothing

I retract everything I said in defence of Digby.

Meh, if there's one true article of faith it's that rugby should be played in cotton jerseys with proper collars

Mellsblue wrote:Diggers isn’t saying it’s perfect or even good enough at present but that, if social media is such a threat to our liberal ways, why are we becoming more liberal and tolerant as a society as it becomes more prevalent.
A gay rugby writer on Haskell’s podcast says the reaction to Folau’s idiocy will have shown gay people that in fact Folau is in the minority. In fact, the whole podcast was about why what Folau believes is idiotic.
RUNY are holding an LGBT+ pride day at their next home game specifically in response to Folau. The owner has written an open letter to Folau telling him what a monumental prick he is.
Billy V was booed by his own fans and oppo fans on the weekend because of his support for Folau’s views whilst Bristol played Raining Men when the won.
Both the RFU and Sarries have released statements saying what Billy has written is wrong and unacceptable.
I’d say the whole episode has shown the LGBT+ society that the majority of the rugby community are very much on their side and if Folau wanted to save homosexuals his plan has very much backfired.

The huge swell of young right wing identity fueled mainly by social media is one example of how this so called liberal tolerance is under threat from an unregulated conduit, but this isn't the place for that discussion.

I'm thrilled with the response of rugby, and of the fans in particular. That has been a battle hard won over the years.