Jump to content
Peter

Israel Folau

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

I think there's some truth to that

It's not about money, it's about principle

Personally, I think it's a lot of crap. I see a millionaire asking for others to fund a fight to get him more money. If that's what being a christian is, then maybe they should have a good long think.

To me it just brings to mind the bit about Jesus, the usurers & the temple.

Edited by Ex-Hasbeen
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has the right to be a christian

he has the contractual obligation to abide by the code of conduct in his contract

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

Personally, I think it's a lot of crap. I see a millionaire asking for others to fund a fight to get him more money. If that's what being a christian is, then maybe they should have a good long think.

To me it just brings to mind the bit about Jesus, the usurers & the temple.

Yeah, an obviously very well off bloke asking for money is not a good look

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does he need others money to be a Christian.

if he’s right with god in his side he will win and get costs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He may have looked more devout if he hadn't turned his back on the Mormon church when he got to the age where he would have had to take a couple years off like Hopoate did. I can remember in his early years with the Storm they were talking about supporting him if he decided to take up the mission.

Obviously the contracts won out over God back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, this is nothing to do with him being Christian. He is not in trouble for posting scripture. He is in trouble for posting an unrelated homophobic image.

It is OK to describe this as a freedom of speech issue but the freedom here is "Can I post homophobic stuff on Insta?" not "Can I be a Christian".

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Peter said:

I still don’t have an issue with what he said and believe he shouldn’t have been sacked for what he said. 

If he however said it while at work, in an official press conference or on the field etc... then sure fire him. 

I do have a massive issue that he is asking for money to help him fight it. The guy has made millions and millions over they years. He has money. Asking for the public to assist is just piss poor. 

^ This, exactly my thoughts. Storm in a teacup elevated to category 5 hurricane.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BarryBevan said:

Why does he need others money to be a Christian.

if he’s right with god in his side he will win and get costs

Perhaps he should be giving his money away?

Matthew 19:24

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

Some interesting contributors. :)

image.thumb.png.fd16d14b27ba60538141b3583ff7884f.png

Ummm, which passage in the bible says exactly "warning...... going to hell?"

I personally believe he'd have had no problem if he had shared the verse from Corinthians, that says they won't inherit the kingdom of god.  But he didn't.  He shared a meme.  I think that's where his issue lies.

When my dad had to go through a court case, that was determined later should never have happened as it did, they it dad to see their house, and pretty much start at blot.  Falou's got more money now than I'll ever see in my lifetime; but it seems he only willing to stand up for his religious beliefs of someone else foots the bill.  They doesn't say a lot to me about what he really thinks of his beliefs.  I thought the insta couple that wanted people to find a holiday for them because they felt getting jobs would be detrimental to their lifestyle, took the cake for me.  But falou ties it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Peter said:

I still don’t have an issue with what he said and believe he shouldn’t have been sacked for what he said. 

If he however said it while at work, in an official press conference or on the field etc... then sure fire him. 

 

 

 

IMO it’s his role (job)) in the Wallabies and position as an ambassador for Australian Rugby Union that gives him over 360,000 followers on Instagram. He be lucky to have more than a few thousand followers if he was only a pastor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Interesting:

Item 1.7 of the Player's code:   Use Social Media appropriately. By all means share your positive experiences of Rugby but do not use Social Media as a means to breach any of the expectations and requirements of you as a player contained in this Code or in any Union, club or competition rules and regulations.

and Item 1.3:  Treat everyone equally, fairly and with dignity regardless of gender or gender identity, sexual orientation, ethnicity, cultural or religious background, age or disability. Any form of bullying, harassment or discrimination has no place in Rugby.

 

Looks and smells like a breach of the code. If he has done it before, and been warned, and then asked to take it down this time & refused, I can see the reasoning behind the dismissal. He has no respect for the game's code of conduct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why otherwise intelligent people who are employed and have their codes of conduct and contracts which all deal with this.

He chose to say it and is free to do so and gets to live with the consequence. Its nothing to do with being a christian, he could have quoted from any book he felt like to make his point. he seems to have issues with certain people, I feel sorry for the gluttons, who is looking out for them.

Fo a guy who is all about love there is this whole second part of the bible where God is lot more loving well until the end but its a lot nicer. But he chooses the passages that suit his agenda. Anywya he seems to be doing well with it proving that religion still holds a lot of sway making otherwise rational humans a whole lot more bigoted, but god said it. That's okay go forth and persecute.

Hang on god didn't write the bible:

It was during the reign of Hezekiah of Judah in the 8th century B.C. that historians believe what would become the Old Testament began to take form, the result of royal scribes recording royal history and heroic legends.

During the reign of Josiah in the 6th century B.C., the books of Deuteronomy and Judges were compiled and added. The final form of the Hebrew Bible developed over the next 200 years when Judah was swallowed up by the expanding Persian Empire.

I know he empowered his minions on earth to do so even King James got a shot, divine right of kings and all that. But His son Charlie who was right into that as gods divine ruler, got his head chopped of by cromwell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mike Del said:

IMO it’s his role (job)) in the Wallabies and position as an ambassador for Australian Rugby Union that gives him over 360,000 followers on Instagram. He be lucky to have more than a few thousand followers if he was only a pastor. 

I don’t agree. But we are all different. 

The courts will decide and we must all abide by their ruling. Same as the pell case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Peter said:

I don’t agree. But we are all different. 

The courts will decide and we must all abide by their ruling. Same as the pell case. 

Fair enough Peter, all good. But if you don't think Rugby and the Wallabies are the reason he has 360,000+ followers..... why do you think they follow him?

Edited by Mike Del

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

Fair enough Peter, all good. But if you don't think Rugby and the Wallabies are the reason he has 360,000+ followers..... why do you think they follow him?

League first then AFL.  

In all honesty. Rugby union is as popular at Triathlon in Australia. 

Union is a sh1t game than barely anyone in Australia watches. Only on foxtel and if you look at the ratings, Union games rarely even make the top 20 sports  

For example. Scroll down to pay tv sports. 

Union not mentioned. I doubt he would have even got 20k followers from union. 

 

CAE6B26D-3303-4330-8FED-3FCA69E39EAB.jpeg

4377BEA7-E257-4789-A8F7-744E490D9C3A.jpeg

Edited by Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

Fair enough Peter, all good. But if you don't think Rugby and the Wallabies are the reason he has 360,000+ followers..... why do you think they follow him?

To be fair I just checked Friday night because maybe there wasn’t a union game on sat night. (I have no idea as I don’t follow union) and they did make the top 20. 

Came in at number 11 with a massive 49000 people watching. 

What a farking joke.  No wonder rugby Australia is broke. If it wasn’t for foxtel, would the sport even exist in Australia?

guessing not. 

There is no way his 360000 followers are from rugby union. 

226B8B10-C404-45B1-9AC3-07BA5D0A4E68.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, monkie said:

It is OK to describe this as a freedom of speech issue but the freedom here is "Can I post homophobic stuff on Insta?" not "Can I be a Christian".

That's exactly right. He has posted dozens of other christian messages, some of them quite confronting, in the past 12 months, and RA had no issue at all with them. Surely that will make it harder for him to use the "religious freedom" angle for this one.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

 

I wonder what Jesus would say?

 

22 hours ago, IronmanFoz said:

Who........ never heard of him. 

If he’s a triathlete he’s probably a course cutter too! 

Not sure, but some of his swim performances are amazing.

Edited by Paul Every

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

Personally, I think it's a lot of crap. I see a millionaire asking for others to fund a fight to get him more money. If that's what being a christian is, then maybe they should have a good long think.

To me it just brings to mind the bit about Jesus, the usurers & the temple.

 

7 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Yeah, an obviously very well off bloke asking for money is not a good look

Especially so when it's requested alongside parents trying to raise money to care for a critically ill child.

We all spend and donate money in a discretionary manner, but as you say, definitely doesn't look good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO Israel Folau is all about Israel Folaus.  I get the impression he likes an audience, getting the attention 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, monkie said:

Once again, this is nothing to do with him being Christian. He is not in trouble for posting scripture. He is in trouble for posting an unrelated homophobic image.

It is OK to describe this as a freedom of speech issue but the freedom here is "Can I post homophobic stuff on Insta?" not "Can I be a Christian".

 

I am not sure it would be classified as a homophobic post. The going to hell thing for adulterers, gays, and other sins, is a common view among many religions.( I work with a mormon who says I am going to hell every day of the week).  I don't agree with his Folous views, he is entitled to them, and also deserves the backlash, but are Rugby guilty of non-inclusiveness for those of a strong religious beliefs? Hence why I see this as a complex case. On one hand, it seems cut and dry he has breached the 'code of conduct' but on the other hand, is the 'code of conduct' discriminatory to those who have these (misguided) religious views.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Surfer said:

IMHO Israel Folau is all about Israel Folaus.  I get the impression he likes an audience, getting the attention 

exactly, that's why I don't believe the fundme page is anything to do with legal fees. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Prince said:

I am not sure it would be classified as a homophobic post. The going to hell thing for adulterers, gays, and other sins, is a common view among many religions.( I work with a mormon who says I am going to hell every day of the week).  I don't agree with his Folous views, he is entitled to them, and also deserves the backlash, but are Rugby guilty of non-inclusiveness for those of a strong religious beliefs? Hence why I see this as a complex case. On one hand, it seems cut and dry he has breached the 'code of conduct' but on the other hand, is the 'code of conduct' discriminatory to those who have these (misguided) religious views.  

My point is that if you read the scripture he quoted there are no words there that refer to gays. There are however ones that refer to people who have sex outside of marriage and various other "sins". To then choose to mention homosexuals in the image is the issue and is, I believe, clearly homophobic.

Edited by monkie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, monkie said:

My point is that if you read the scripture he quoted there are no words there that refer to gays. There are however ones that refer to people who have sex outside of marriage and various other "sins". To then choose to mention homosexuals in the image is the issue and is, I believe, clearly homophobic.

Actually 

Quote

Leviticus contains two well known statements about homosexual activity:

You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

Quote

The law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, men who practise homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine. (1 Timothy. 1:9-10)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Peter said:

Actually 

 

But the scripture he quoted was:

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Check page 4. I googled most of the definitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Prince said:

I am not sure it would be classified as a homophobic post. The going to hell thing for adulterers, gays, and other sins, is a common view among many religions.( I work with a mormon who says I am going to hell every day of the week).  I don't agree with his Folous views, he is entitled to them, and also deserves the backlash, but are Rugby guilty of non-inclusiveness for those of a strong religious beliefs? Hence why I see this as a complex case. On one hand, it seems cut and dry he has breached the 'code of conduct' but on the other hand, is the 'code of conduct' discriminatory to those who have these (misguided) religious views.  

Ah religious freedom the freedom to be an arsehole and not be subject to the same rules as everyone else.

 

imagine if the kkk used the bible and religious freedom to justify their hate

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Peter said:

League first then AFL.  

In all honesty. Rugby union is as popular at Triathlon in Australia. 

Union is a sh1t game than barely anyone in Australia watches. Only on foxtel and if you look at the ratings, Union games rarely even make the top 20 sports  

For example. Scroll down to pay tv sports. 

Union not mentioned. I doubt he would have even got 20k followers from union. 

 

CAE6B26D-3303-4330-8FED-3FCA69E39EAB.jpeg

4377BEA7-E257-4789-A8F7-744E490D9C3A.jpeg

It can’t be League & Rules? Folau only opened his Insta account just before switching to Rugby. I think he only had about 10,000 followers when he was first selected for the Wallabies and has 640,000+ now. Even Quade Cooper has all most 500,000 Inst followers and he can’t get a gig for Aus.

 Folau rugby career dwarfs his League & Rules efforts. He’s  played 62 Rugby Tests for Australia (about 8 for League) and is the 5th highest Wallaby try scorer of all time. 

Peter you realise the majority of kids playing Rugby in clubs and private schools are following Folau through social media....which should make him think even more responsibly about what he posts IMO

Edited by Mike Del

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

It can’t be League & Rules? Folau only opened his Insta account just before switching to Rugby. I think he only had about 10,000 followers when he was first selected for the Wallabies and has 640,000+ now. Even Quade Cooper has all most 500,000 Inst followers and he can’t get a gig for Aus.

It's probably religion...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Prince said:

I am not sure it would be classified as a homophobic post. The going to hell thing for adulterers, gays, and other sins, is a common view among many religions.( I work with a mormon who says I am going to hell every day of the week).  I don't agree with his Folous views, he is entitled to them, and also deserves the backlash, but are Rugby guilty of non-inclusiveness for those of a strong religious beliefs? Hence why I see this as a complex case. On one hand, it seems cut and dry he has breached the 'code of conduct' but on the other hand, is the 'code of conduct' discriminatory to those who have these (misguided) religious views.  

I was told by someone who was quite deeply effected by Folau’s posted comment that the biggest issue was the fact that the sins mentioned were all choices or decisions a person can make, but being a homosexual isn’t a choice.

 

Edited by Mike Del

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mike Del said:

I was told by someone who was quite deeply effected by Folau’s posted comment that the biggest issue was the fact that the sins mentioned were all choices or decisions a person can make, but being a homosexual isn’t a choice.

If what Peter posted above is correct, perhaps they should take it up with whoever wrote the Bible then.

Maybe someone should write a few more books or chapters to update it. JK Rowling might be available.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mike Del said:

I was told by someone who was quite deeply effected by Folau’s posted comment

i must say this really annoys me - people being 'quite deeply effected'.

Do they think they are going to hell?

If they don't believe the Bible says they will go to hell, then why are they effected at all?

If they DO believe the Bible says they will go to hell, what difference does it make that someone says it?  They already believe what he said!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the going to hell bit, it's vilifying people because of their preferences, it's not even sexual in some cases. What happens if you are totally open to all genders? What if the person who floats your boat just happens to have the same bits as you? 

He has a shitload of followers, lots are impressionable kids, we need to be accepting of all people, yes there are people listed on there where it is a choice, but walk a mile in someone elses shoes before you judge. Guess I am going to hell...I'm a drunk, fornicating adulterer. 😂

It's all made up mumbo jumbo anyway. But they can believe what they want. Just don't make people feel like crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, trinube said:

i must say this really annoys me - people being 'quite deeply effected'.

Do they think they are going to hell?

If they don't believe the Bible says they will go to hell, then why are they effected at all?

If they DO believe the Bible says they will go to hell, what difference does it make that someone says it?  They already believe what he said!

Easy to say as an adult. Water off a duck's back etc. Words from a homophobic sky-goblin believing self aggrandising greedy hypocritical cock womble can easily be dismissed. 

Tougher as a 13 year old who idolises him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, monkie said:

Easy to say as an adult. Water off a duck's back etc. Words from a homophobic sky-goblin believing self aggrandising greedy hypocritical cock womble can easily be dismissed. 

Tougher as a 13 year old who idolises him.

But you aren't worried about offending a 13 year old who might happen to believe in what you call a 'sky goblin'? 

The internet is full of 'hate speech'. Heck I'm sure there might be teenage Christians reading transitions who are troubled by the hate levelled at their religion on this forum. 

Everyone either needs to accept people will and ways have had differing views and say hurtful things, or ban all hurtful things being said? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, monkie said:

Easy to say as an adult. Water off a duck's back etc. Words from a homophobic sky-goblin believing self aggrandising greedy hypocritical cock womble can easily be dismissed. 

Tougher as a 13 year old who idolises him.

Why? Someone needs to sit him down and simply tell him the truth. Start with the myth of religion and his mind would immediately be at ease.This is why i hate religion so much - it thrives on fear over fact and they'd love that kids are fearful.  

If this was my son, he'd hold no fear at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, more said:

But you aren't worried about offending a 13 year old who might happen to believe in what you call a 'sky goblin'? 

Nope, I'd want to have a discussion with him about why he feels the need to believe in made up stuff but then if he continues to choose to believe in what he has been indoctrinated to believe then that's fine. I won't judge him for it, he's welcome to his beliefs but I'm also free to call him out on them if he uses them as an excuse for homphobia.

And I don't hate Christians or Christianity, I think it's daft and I am always confused about the intellectual challenge of believing in unprovable things but I certainly don't hate it. I hate it when it's used as an excuse for being a twat though.

Edited by monkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, trinube said:

Why? Someone needs to sit him down and simply tell him the truth. Start with the myth of religion and his mind would immediately be at ease.This is why i hate religion so much - it thrives on fear over fact and they'd love that kids are fearful.  

If this was my son, he'd hold no fear at all.

Agreed. It is easy to point out the logical fallacy of any argument that is based on myths and legends but having been that 13 year old it really isn't that simple.

It also normalises homophobia and bullying people based on their sexuality. If this "hero" can get away with it then it will change the way that people act in the school yard, in work, etc. Words do matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, monkie said:

It also normalises homophobia and bullying people based on their sexuality. If this "hero" can get away with it then it will change the way that people act in the school yard, in work, etc. Words do matter.

Another of my pet hates, the ability of the LBGTQI community to take sole offence when millions were referenced. Where's all your compassion for the drunks, thieves, adulterers and athiests that were equally condemned?  You seem fine that offending them is normalised?

Here's a tip, words are just words. Ignore them, get off social media, laugh at the bigots and mock their righteousness. You can't control what people say, but you have absolute and complete control over how you react to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, trinube said:

Another of my pet hates, the ability of the LBGTQI community to take sole offence when millions were referenced. Where's all your compassion for the drunks, thieves, adulterers and athiests that were equally condemned?  You seem fine that offending them is normalised?

Here's a tip, words are just words. Ignore them, get off social media, laugh at the bigots and mock their righteousness. You can't control what people say, but you have absolute and complete control over how you react to it.

scenario, some one posts against aboriginals or African's should we just ignore that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, trinube said:

Another of my pet hates, the ability of the LBGTQI community to take sole offence when millions were referenced. Where's all your compassion for the drunks, thieves, adulterers and athiests that were equally condemned?  You seem fine that offending them is normalised?

There are two reasons why that argument fails.

1) Those are choices, being gay is not.

2) The others were named in the scripture quoted. Homosexuals were not. Falou chose to include them because he's homophobic and intent on using his platform to pursue that agenda. 

I'm not offendende, I have taken the same amount of offence as I do to the rantings of a drunkard. That doesn't stop his comments being homophobic.

Edited by monkie
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BarryBevan said:

scenario, some one posts against aboriginals or African's should we just ignore that

You can do whatever you want, but if you never read them you can't take offence. If a tree falls in the forest...

More the point I was making, if someone posts against aboriginal, Africans, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Catholics, Americans and Eskimos is it right to just be offended for the Catholics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, monkie said:

There are two reasons why that argument fails.

1) Those are choices, being gay is not.

2) The others were named in the scripture quoted. Homosexuals were not. Falou chose to include them because he's homophobic and intent on using his platform to pursue that agenda. 

refer Peter's post for answers for both

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, trinube said:

refer Peter's post for answers for both

That's not the bit he quoted though. Read my post where I quoted the actual scripture that he included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...