Page 33 of 33 FirstFirst ... 23313233
Results 481 to 490 of 490
  1. #481
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    953
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    I'm surprised that Folau seems to have appealed on only one ground. As I said, I don't expect the judges to uphold an appeal based purely on religious discrimination. But it could be a while before we find out.
    I'd be interested in learning why you think RA are not in breach of Section 772 of the Fair Work Act. I am also surprised to learn that Folau seems to have appealed on only one ground. After all, to dismiss one employee (Israel) for allegedly breaching the code of conduct while not even investigating other alleged breaches of the code of conduct (by, respectively, the coach of the Wallabies, the coach of the Waratahs, and the CEO of RA), does seem to hint at discriminatory, reckless and capricious behaviour by RA.

  2. #482
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,548
    Quote Originally Posted by idledim View Post
    I'd be interested in learning why you think RA are not in breach of Section 772 of the Fair Work Act.
    I don't think they are. I believe that Folau was sacked for a breach of contract, and I expect that will be the decision. And I don't believe that the Fair Work Commission will rule that religious belief allows you to ignore a contract.

  3. #483
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    953
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    I don't think they are. I believe that Folau was sacked for a breach of contract, and I expect that will be the decision. And I don't believe that the Fair Work Commission will rule that religious belief allows you to ignore a contract.
    I am aware of your beliefs - but simply re-stating them is hardly evidence of why you think that the law of contract trumps Section 772. What is Section 772 doing in the Act if there are other statutes that trump it? Are you aware of anything in the Fair Work Act to indicate that there are circumstances where 772 shall not apply?

    You remain silent on the broader question of why only some employees should be subject to disciplinary action for alleged breaches of contract in circumstances where other employees of the same organisation are not even investigated for alleged breaches of contract. It does seem to me that, if this is the case, RA has clearly used its code of conduct to punish Israel Folau, while allowing Raelene Castle, Michael Cheika and Daryl Gibson to escape scrutiny and/or sanction for their breaches of the coaches and administrators codes of conduct in their management of the matter.
    Last edited by idledim; 07-06-2019 at 11:10 AM.

  4. #484
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,548
    Quote Originally Posted by idledim View Post
    I am aware of your beliefs - but simply re-stating them is hardly evidence of why you think that the law of contract trumps Section 772. What is Section 772 doing in the Act if there are other statutes that trump it? Are you aware of anything in the Fair Work Act to indicate that there are circumstances where 772 shall not apply?
    I've kept my comments brief so as to remain (largely) on topic. The broader issues have little to do directly with homosexuality. Briefly, I'm not convinced that Section 772 does apply here - in other words, I'm not convinced that Folau was sacked because of his religious views. Even if he was, allowing workers to void their contracts because of their religious beliefs creates potential problems for employers, and I don't think the FWC will want to make such a ruling (just as the Coalition has avoided this issue).

    But speculation is fairly pointless at this stage. Folau and RA may even settle before a hearing takes place.

    Quote Originally Posted by idledim View Post
    You remain silent on the broader question of why only some employees should be subject to disciplinary action for alleged breaches of contract in circumstances where other employees of the same organisation are not even investigated for alleged breaches of contract. It does seem to me that, if this is the case, RA has clearly used its code of conduct to punish Israel Folau, while allowing Raelene Castle, Michael Cheika and Daryl Gibson to escape scrutiny and/or sanction for their breaches of the coaches and administrators codes of conduct in their management of the matter.
    You may be right. But I don't believe this is currently an issue. And even if it becomes one, it wouldn't be a same-sex issue.

  5. #485
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    19,310

    This is clearly not breach of contract but selective punishment of Christians

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    I don't think they are. I believe that Folau was sacked for a breach of contract, and I expect that will be the decision. And I don't believe that the Fair Work Commission will rule that religious belief allows you to ignore a contract.
    That is a BS hypocritical argument from the corrupt RA bureaucrats who are just slaves to the QANTAS homosexual activist. I've already pointed out that citing a verse from one's own Holy Book is not a breach of contract, in that it doesn't bring rugby into disrepute. If that does, then why not these other actions as explained in an earlier post, as per Darren Kane's article in the SMH:

    Context: How does Folau's conduct stack up when compared to the acts of some other professional sportsmen?

    So, what did Folau NOT do? Well, he didn’t lay the boot into his heavily pregnant wife’s stomach, while she lay on the floor, cowering in the foetal position. Nor did he pick up his ex-girlfriend and hurl her into a garage door at 2am following an epic bender. Folau didn’t kick the livin’ bejesus out of an unconscious man lying in the gutter, outside a nightclub.

    Folau hasn’t intentionally smashed an opponent’s jaw to smithereens, in a pre-meditated on-field incident. He didn’t gouge at an opponent player’s eyes, with all the fervour of a nine-year-old excising the last skerrick of ice cream from a four-litre tub. Not once has Folau reckoned upon sticking his index finger up opponents’ bums as being a red-hot, stealthy defensive strategy.

    Folau hasn’t been caught on an iPhone, pants around his ankles and frolicking in the company of an unsuspecting mutt. Indeed, neither has he orchestrated the running of an illegal dog-fighting ring; possessed implements used to give electric shocks to thoroughbreds; or done anything else to raise the ire of the RSPCA.

    Not even on one occasion has Folau been accused either of unlawfully distributing intimate videos without the consent of those filmed, or of mistreating women in any other way. Never has Folau been caught drink-driving; not even after having a 13-hour break from the schooners and thinking he’d be under 0.05. Folau hasn’t been charged with any crime.

    Folau hasn’t racially abused his opponents; hectored at them as "monkeys". He hasn’t sledged opponents as being "gypsy boys" who should contemplate retreating to their caravan homes.

    Folau hasn’t manhandled referees, assaulted teammates and bashed them to a pulp, or stolen money from his fellow players’ wallets while they weren’t looking. Israel hasn’t been caught on video, bragging about his adoration of the "Bondi marching powder"; never once has he tested positive to using prohibited substances either in or out of competition.

    Folau’s never placed bets on opposition teams to win, or lose. Folau hasn’t been caught red-handed, in the throes of orchestrated sports cheating, or scheming to rig the system. He hasn’t even chewed on "blood capsules" at the crucial point of a pivotal game, to stop time. Folau isn’t accused of standing over young and impressionable teammates; compelling them to dope, cheat, go to church or do anything else, with the threat of being expelled from the team if they refused.

    Now had Folau done any of those things, then maybe he’d be assured of World Cup selection. Because with maybe one or two exceptions, the professional athletes who actually did do these things weren’t banned from their sport for life.

    Instead, what Folau has done — the totality of his conduct — has been to publish material on his social media channels that’s been deemed as offensive and a high-level breach of Rugby Australia's code of conduct. Keep this simple: Folau published some excerpts from Bible passages and his summaries of them. That’s as grave as it gets.
    “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.” — Abba Eban on the UN general assembly

    “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.” — Obi-Wan Kenobi on the UN kakistocracy

  6. #486
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,548
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    That is a BS hypocritical argument from the corrupt RA bureaucrats who are just slaves to the QANTAS homosexual activist.
    Your conspiracy theory is invalidated by the fact that Folau wasn't fired for his first post.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    I've already pointed out that citing a verse from one's own Holy Book is not a breach of contract, in that it doesn't bring rugby into disrepute.
    But Folau wasn't fired for bringing rugby into disrepute. He was fired for breaching RA's code of conduct. The fact that other players (in other sports?) haven't been banned for worse behaviour doesn't disprove that.

  7. #487
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,768
    I realise not exactly on topic but in Rugby League now the (mostly Islander) players have a (Christian) prayer meeting after each game and it is respected. I wonder what would be the response if the Muslim players did the same thing?
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  8. #488
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,272
    Has “Homosexual” always been in the Bible?

    The word arsenokoitai shows up in two different verses in the bible, but it was not translated to mean homosexual until 1946. ...

    I had a German friend come back to town and I asked if he could help me with some passages in one of my German Bibles from the 1800s. So we went to Leviticus 18:22 and he’s translating it for me word for word. In the English where it says “Man shall not lie with man, for it is an abomination,” the German version says “Man shall not lie with young boys as he does with women, for it is an abomination.” I said, “What?! Are you sure?” He said, “Yes!” Then we went to Leviticus 20:13— same thing, “Young boys.” So we went to 1 Corinthians to see how they translated arsenokoitai (original greek word) and instead of homosexuals it said, “Boy molesters will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

    I then grabbed my facsimile copy of Martin Luther’s original German translation from 1534. My friend is reading through it for me and he says, “Ed, this says the same thing!” They use the word knabenschander. Knaben is boy, schander is molester. This word “boy molesters” carried through the next several centuries of German Bible translations. Knabenschander is also in 1 Timothy 1:10. So the interesting thing is, I asked if they ever changed the word arsenokoitai to homosexual in modern translations. So my friend found it and told me, “The first time homosexual appears in a German translation is 1983.” ...

    I also have a 1674 Swedish version and an 1830 Norwegian version of the Bible. I asked one of my friends, who was attending Fuller seminary and is fluent in both Swedish and Norwegian, to look at these verses for me. So we met at a coffee shop in Pasadena with my old Bibles. (She didn’t really know why I was asking.) Just like reading an old English Bible, it’s not easy to read. The letters are a little bit funky, the spelling is a little bit different. So she’s going through it carefully, and then her face comes up, “Do you know what this says?!” and I said, “No! That’s why you are here!” She said, “It says boy abusers, boy molesters.” ...
    meep meep

  9. #489
    CC Grandmaster antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    16,768
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    Has “Homosexual” always been in the Bible?

    The word arsenokoitai shows up in two different verses in the bible, but it was not translated to mean homosexual until 1946. ...

    I had a German friend come back to town and I asked if he could help me with some passages in one of my German Bibles from the 1800s. So we went to Leviticus 18:22 and he’s translating it for me word for word. In the English where it says “Man shall not lie with man, for it is an abomination,” the German version says “Man shall not lie with young boys as he does with women, for it is an abomination.” I said, “What?! Are you sure?” He said, “Yes!” Then we went to Leviticus 20:13— same thing, “Young boys.” So we went to 1 Corinthians to see how they translated arsenokoitai (original greek word) and instead of homosexuals it said, “Boy molesters will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

    I then grabbed my facsimile copy of Martin Luther’s original German translation from 1534. My friend is reading through it for me and he says, “Ed, this says the same thing!” They use the word knabenschander. Knaben is boy, schander is molester. This word “boy molesters” carried through the next several centuries of German Bible translations. Knabenschander is also in 1 Timothy 1:10. So the interesting thing is, I asked if they ever changed the word arsenokoitai to homosexual in modern translations. So my friend found it and told me, “The first time homosexual appears in a German translation is 1983.” ...

    I also have a 1674 Swedish version and an 1830 Norwegian version of the Bible. I asked one of my friends, who was attending Fuller seminary and is fluent in both Swedish and Norwegian, to look at these verses for me. So we met at a coffee shop in Pasadena with my old Bibles. (She didn’t really know why I was asking.) Just like reading an old English Bible, it’s not easy to read. The letters are a little bit funky, the spelling is a little bit different. So she’s going through it carefully, and then her face comes up, “Do you know what this says?!” and I said, “No! That’s why you are here!” She said, “It says boy abusers, boy molesters.” ...
    Well it is certain damnation for many a Catholic priest!

    I hope young girls are protected in the Good Book but I doubt so. Also the Bible does not give a verdict on trannies changing over nor how they should be classified once changed over.
    Last edited by antichrist; 14-06-2019 at 06:55 PM.
    Zionism is racism as defined by the UN, Israel by every dirty means available steals land and water, kill Palestinian freedom fighters and civilians, and operates an apartheid system to drive more Palestinians off their land

  10. #490
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,385
    Political Posting Mumma reportedly goes down bigtime on defamation (the $100K is unconfirmed from the other side, but the pinned post is real):

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/lanesainty/...ative-activist

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Miscellaneous/Funny Pictures
    By Alan Shore in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 391
    Last Post: 10-07-2014, 02:19 PM
  2. Miscellaneous maths stuff
    By Rincewind in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30-07-2010, 09:59 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •