Mega Thread Port Forum General AFL Thread Part 23

[Schulzenfest]

And Islam doesn't express those opinions... openly? As did almost every Church demonination up until 10, maybe 20 years ago? I mean a religious organisation being anti abortion anti homosexuality is hardly earth shattering stuff. Were you born yesterday? It is illegal to be gay in almost every single Muslim country. In 13 of them it is punishable by death. Bachar Houli seems like a really decent chap, but if we are cancelling people by religious association, as they have done with this Essendon fellow, well you'd have to say that old Bachar shoiuld be fired into the sun by the cancellation brigade.

You realise this whole argument falls apart when you consider that there are probably hundreds of Christian players, coaches and assorted hangers on in the league, right? In terms of reasons to be 'cancelled' Bachar is no different from any of them.

 

[Papa G]

You realise this whole argument falls apart when you consider that there are probably hundreds of Christian players, coaches and assorted hangers on in the league, right? In terms of reasons to be 'cancelled' Bachar is no different from any of them.

Why aren't they being cancelled then? This needs to be brought to the attention of the Cancellers. I know your a fringe player around the Tripod of Cuck, but this is cause you could get behind with them.

 

[TeeKray]

This whole area is a minefield.

For example, Collingwood have a long term sponsor called Emirates. This company is wholly owned by the Government of Dubai. Homosexuality is punishable in Dubai with imprisonment up to 10 years.

Should Collingwood really be associated with and taking money from a company like this?

 

[jakey]

Why aren't they being cancelled then? This needs to be brought to the attention of the Cancellers. I know your a fringe player around the Tripod of Cuck, but this is cause you could get behind with them.

Because they aren't publicly espousing hateful views. It's pretty obvious.

 

[Papa G]

This whole area is a minefield.

For example, Collingwood have a long term sponsor called Emirates. This company is wholly owned by the Government of Dubai. Homosexuality is punishable in Dubai with imprisonment up to 10 years.

Should Collingwood really be associated with and taking money from a company like this?

There is no actual end to Virtual Signalling.

 

[Papa G]

Because they aren't publicly espousing hateful views. It's pretty obvious.

This "view" was expressed in 2013. Well before Thornburn was even there.

 

[chiwigi]

This whole area is a minefield.

For example, Collingwood have a long term sponsor called Emirates. This company is wholly owned by the Government of Dubai. Homosexuality is punishable in Dubai with imprisonment up to 10 years.

Should Collingwood really be associated with and taking money from a company like this?

No

 

[Wargreymon90]

This is painful to read

 

[Interstater]

Listening to Stephen Rowe on 5AA for the first time in forever.

Fair dinkum, he makes Sir Les Patterson look like Mike Cannon-Brookes.

 

[Schulzenfest]

This "view" was expressed in 2013. Well before Thornburn was even there.

And upon his entry into the role, he immediately denounced those hateful views?

Or upon those comments resurfacing in the last couple of days, he belatedly denounced those hateful views and stated that under his leadership his church would do better in future?

No, he did none of that, he just had a big cry about how he was being cancelled.

 

[JimmyBC]

Listening to Stephen Rowe on 5AA for the first time in forever.

Fair dinkum, he makes Sir Les Patterson look like Mike Cannon-Brookes.

Dude needs to be cancelled.

 

[edgie]

He resigned.

If he wanted he could have dug in.

He cancelled himself.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

 

[Del165198]

Because...Muslims.

Bachar Houli is NOT the leader of his church. Andrew Thorburn IS.

The hypocrisy is all yours.

Of course papa ****wit goes "look Muslim bad too!". A bunch of similar single digit IQ posters on the main board tried the same thing and immediately got humiliated for their utter moronic attempt at diversion.

I wonder if papa ****face could tell us the last time a radical imam was elected CEO of an AFL club? Never? Then it's not really ****ing comparable is it.

 

[edgie]

The AFLW player who sat out of pride round should definitely receive more heat. Same as the NRL players who didn't want to wear the Guernsey.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

 

[Del165198]

The AFLW player who sat out of pride round should definitely receive more heat. Same as the NRL players who didn't want to wear the Guernsey.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

Agreed, that was shit. We shouldn't tolerate intolerance. You don't get to hide behind religious beliefs when those beliefs oppress other people.

 

[Sleezy]

The AFLW player who sat out of pride round should definitely receive more heat. Same as the NRL players who didn't want to wear the Guernsey.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

If she's not trying to impose her belief system on her LGBT team mates (she well have been, I don't know, but for the sake of argument let's assume not), why should they be able to impose their belief system on her?

 

[FishingRick04]

If she's not trying to impose her belief system on her LGBT team mates (she well have been, I don't know, but for the sake of argument let's assume not), why should they be able to impose their belief system on her?

I learnt early never to argue on righteousness, everyone who believes something firmly is right in their mind.

 

[simba_]

does anyone here like footy

 

[dirty2]

does anyone here like footy

Not at the moment.... Jhf in port Guernsey might change that but.

 

[Del165198]

does anyone here like footy

No, have you seen port play the last 8 years?

 

[edgie]

If she's not trying to impose her belief system on her LGBT team mates (she well have been, I don't know, but for the sake of argument let's assume not), why should they be able to impose their belief system on her?

The AFL and it's clubs pride (choice of word there) themselves on inclusiveness and diversity, even if it is like 80% straight white men. By not taking part in this round, this player shows they do not value diversity nor equality.

If she just wants to play footy and practice her beliefs, live according to her faith, good for her. When she's getting paid for it though, you should have to tow the line, or find another mob to work for that doesn't insist on those values. It's farcical that the AFL can push these things, and when one pushes back, it's essentially 'that's ok you don't have to support historically oppressed minorities'. If you don't think for one second this would be completely different if it were a man opting to sit out of indigenous round, you'd be an idiot. By allowing the AFL is still saying it's ok to think of homosexuals as less than others.

All employers have a code of conduct. That's not imposing a belief system. Surely opting out of a pride round, is in violation of that?

 

[Sleezy]

The AFL and it's clubs pride (choice of word there) themselves on inclusiveness and diversity, even if it is like 80% straight white men. By not taking part in this round, this player shows they do not value diversity nor equality.

If she just wants to play footy and practice her beliefs, live according to her faith, good for her. When she's getting paid for it though, you should have to tow the line, or find another mob to work for that doesn't insist on those values. It's farcical that the AFL can push these things, and when one pushes back, it's essentially 'that's ok you don't have to support historically oppressed minorities'. If you don't think for one second this would be completely different if it were a man opting to sit out of indigenous round, you'd be an idiot. By allowing the AFL is still saying it's ok to think of homosexuals as less than others.

All employers have a code of conduct. That's not imposing a belief system.

Most codes of conduct are about positive discrimination. IE we do not exclude or harrass based on race, religion, gender, sexuality.

That is different, I think, from forcing participation in and celebration of a belief structure or community movement that a player does not belong to.

It's the difference between a Muslim in a majority Christian team praying and practicing separately then coming together to play, and forcing the Muslim player to join in the team prayer prior to the game.

Side note: I think your indigenous player example is a false equivalence. I don't know of any established religions that consider being Aboriginal a sin.

Also note: I'm assuming no power imbalance here. All players are on the same footing. This becomes a lot more murky when a person with power also holds discriminatory beliefs, and I don't know what the answer to that problem is.

 

[edgie]

Agreed, that was s**t. We shouldn't tolerate intolerance. You don't get to hide behind religious beliefs when those beliefs oppress other people.

A lot of atheist xenophobes hide behind religion when it comes to intolerant views. Those who would usually make fun of bible bashers magically find respect for the Lord when it comes to Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

 

[edgie]

Most codes of conduct are about positive discrimination. IE we do not exclude or harrass based on race, religion, gender, sexuality.

That is different, I think, from forcing participation in and celebration of a belief structure or community movement that a player does not belong to.

It's the difference between a Muslim in a majority Christian team praying and practicing separately then coming together to play, and forcing the Muslim player to join in the team prayer prior to the game.

Side note: I think your indigenous player example is a false equivalence. I don't know of any established religions that consider being Aboriginal a sin.

Also note: I'm assuming no power imbalance here. All players are on the same footing. This becomes a lot more murky when a person with power also holds discriminatory beliefs, and I don't know what the answer to that problem is.

But if the superiority of whites was in the bible, then it would be ok? I'm pretty sure the KKK were religious. I guess that would be fine then for them to practise their bullshit.

I think it's all bullshit mate I do, but the act of these things and stripey guernseys is to say 'you are valued and welcome in our community', as opposed to the world 10-20-30-40 etc etc years ago, when they, were not.

By not doing that, what message does that send? What's the opposite of being valued and welcome?

Nobody is asking her to wear her gay pride top to mass at the mosque, or somewhere it would be a conflict, but representing her workplace showing gay people are welcome to be a part of it, and same as everyone else, shouldn't send anyone to hell.

 

[Sleezy]

But if the superiority of whites was in the bible, then it would be ok? I'm pretty sure the KKK were religious. I guess that would be fine then for them to practise their bullshit.

I think it's all bullshit mate I do, but the act of these things and stripey guernseys is to say 'you are valued and welcome in our community', as opposed to the world 10-20-30-40 etc etc years ago, when they, were not.

By not doing that, what message does that send? What's the opposite of being valued and welcome?

Nobody is asking her to wear her gay pride top to mass at the mosque, or somewhere it would be a conflict, but representing her workplace showing gay people are welcome to be a part of it, and same as everyone else, shouldn't send anyone to hell.

I just think we need to make space for people who are somewhere between the Uniting Church and the Westboro Baptist's to exist. Forcing them to choose one way or the other is how extremists are born.

By letting the girl take her time, maybe next year she does wear the jumper. Maybe it takes two years, maybe it never happens. But forcing it will not help.

And on the KKK, they were religious in exactly the same was as the Westboro Baptists are religious. As you said, they used it as a mask for their hate.

But I'm not talking about a hateful person (and again, I don't know the specifics here. I'm using her as an example). I'm talking about something in between. About someone who, maybe, needs time to figure out what they think, and shouldn't have that decision made for her before she's ready. That's all.