[Law] Folau’s online comments have taken a turn for the worse.

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,680
Post Likes
1,760
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I agree there is nothing wrong with using the kind of language to make a point. In these two examples it wasn't that ad hominem.

However in these recent posts below, you will find that ad hominem thingy

These are not ad hominim IMO - YMMV


From a free speech standpoint his has actually turned out to be more productive to inclusion in rugby and that wasn't his intent.

1. He was fired
2. He coach was threatened (because of his inciting other, according to you)
3. Wigan announced pride day 20 minutes after his signing
4. a misleading response was reported at dragons game concerning confiscated flags
5. Dragons, his team, announce a pride day

IF put it out for everyone to talk about and solve it, and he was to stuck in "silly form of delusion" to know it.

Yeah, I don't buy into that kind of sick spin. I find it disgusting.

Its like saying "well thanks to the Christchurch Mosque shooter killing all those people, New Zealanders have had to address the issue of assault rifles, and banned them, and that can only be a good thing, amirite!?"

In my book, Folau gets ZERO credit for any of the good stuff that may have happened in the wake of his rantings.


And lastly, I do not know any devout homosexual Christians. But if I did, I'm pretty sure they have come to an understanding of this passage presented by IF. The "devout" thing is kind of a give away. and I'm pretty sure they would explain it to others. Kinda goes with being devout. and I'm pretty sure they know IF is incorrect. and I'm pretty sure they even pray for IF

See my previous post.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
My twopence...

Above and beyond causing offence, one of the problems with the kind of non-inclusive hate speech spewed by IF is that it causes pain and internal oppression to people growing up inside that belief system.

Imagine being born into a family in IF's church, and finding out as you are growing up that you are gay. You would be forced to keep it secret and would be terrified that if your family found out they'd hate you because they believed you were going to hell.

This is a form of child abuse and many gay people in strict religions (not just Christian) attempt suicide as a way out. Sadly, some succeed.

Worse, in some Muslim-majority countries, gay people are at risk of being murdered by their own families, to erase the shame they feel at having a gay person in their family, because of religious teachings about homosexuality.

Which brings me to my other point: intolerance in our (Western) society emboldens attacks on minorities, in this case gay-bashers.

And, as they say in the classics, the holocaust didn't begin with Auschwitz: it began with demonising and dehumanising Jews, gays, Gypsies, etc.

So this is not a zero-sum game: intolerance causes pain, suffering, abuse, attacks, suicide, and death. Up to and including mass murder.

We need to be vigilant against intolerance, wherever and whenever it rears its ugly head.

Kudos to Rugby for supporting tolerance and inclusion around the world, and for pulling the plug on intolerant hate-speech.

please stop inciting me to hate IF. Thanks in advance.

And, as they say in the classics, the holocaust didn't begin with Auschwitz: it began with demonising and dehumanising Jews, gays, Gypsies, etc.

Good ol' Godwin strikes again!
https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...dwin%27s_law&usg=AOvVaw0fZJRCxAnufWKMyIE5qCSw

and if you invoke Godwin's Law:
1. you automatically lose the argument, and
2. the thread can be closed.

Bye!
 
Last edited:

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,680
Post Likes
1,760
Current Referee grade:
Level 2

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
Godwin's law is just another one of those eponymous laws, like Betteridge's Law or Mertons Law... they are intended to be humorous rather than literal truth.
Just like Dickie E? :biggrin:
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,336
Post Likes
1,440
She got screwed, but you can't trust NRL discipline. That fiasco over Taylan May is evidence enough of that.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
She got screwed, but you can't trust NRL discipline. That fiasco over Taylan May is evidence enough of that.
why do you think she got screwed? Aren't we back to "you can have freedom of speech, but not freedom from consequences"? Genuine question, I'm curious how all this works
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,336
Post Likes
1,440
I think you know the answer all too well, and are simply trolling.
Folau made statements that broke with RA's values.
The NRL - as far as I know - doesn't purport to have any values relating to supporting the monarchy, and I think First Nations players will have a very different view of the British monarchy than, say, V'Landys.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I think you know the answer all too well, and are simply trolling.
comments like that are why sensible debate is a rare commodity these days.

Anyway, here is the NRL value statement.


So slagging off at the monarchy is only a problem if the value statement specifically mentions the monarchy and isn't covered by:

The NRL are committed to promoting respectful behaviour and positive values.​


It strikes me as sad that if I went out into the street with 3 flags, the Australian flag, the rainbow flag and the Aboriginal flag, there would be only 1 that I could burn with impunity
 
Last edited:

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,336
Post Likes
1,440
comments like that are why sensible debate is a rare commodity these days.

Anyway, here is the NRL value statement.


So slagging off at the monarchy is only a problem if the value statement specifically mentions the monarchy and isn't covered by:

The NRL are committed to promoting respectful behaviour and positive values.​


It strikes me as sad that if I went out into the street with 3 flags, the Australian flag, the rainbow flag and the Aboriginal flag, there would be only 1 that I could burn with impunity
In general, values and ethical statements are there to protect those who are usually lower down the pecking order and who usually get kicked down upon, often based on a characteristic that is not a choice.

Royalty certainly don't fit the first, and I could argue either way on the second.
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
478
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
Ignoring ethnicity, monarchy, nationality, etc, I feel that a professional rugby player (or similar) going online and publicly calling a recently deceased person as a "dumb dog" is poor form and reflects badly on that person and their organisation. For certain, if one of my kids said that they would get told off.
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,336
Post Likes
1,440
Ignoring ethnicity, monarchy, nationality, etc, I feel that a professional rugby player (or similar) going online and publicly calling a recently deceased person as a "dumb dog" is poor form and reflects badly on that person and their organisation. For certain, if one of my kids said that they would get told off.
I may have a different view to that. I work with an Aboriginal firm over here, and a lot of our members are senior. Senior enough to remember the stolen generations, and the underpinnings of that, as well as the NT Intervention. Their perspective on the Royals uis not uniformly one of respect to them.

I'm not sure I agree with what she said, but I can understand her perspective.
 

Jarrod Burton


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
725
Post Likes
208
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I may have a different view to that. I work with an Aboriginal firm over here, and a lot of our members are senior. Senior enough to remember the stolen generations, and the underpinnings of that, as well as the NT Intervention. Their perspective on the Royals uis not uniformly one of respect to them.

I'm not sure I agree with what she said, but I can understand her perspective.
I see what you are saying, but respect goes both ways. Calling someone a dumb dog in the media is always going to attract the wrong sort of attention.

Unfortunately too many commentators (especially around the Voice) demand respect for their opinion while treating others like shit and not worthy of discussion. That sort of behavior will reduce the chances of the referendum getting through - that and the fact that the structure and "powers" of the voice won't be enshrined in the constitution but within legislation so it can be changed by the government of the day, not the people.
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
478
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
I may have a different view to that. I work with an Aboriginal firm over here, and a lot of our members are senior. Senior enough to remember the stolen generations, and the underpinnings of that, as well as the NT Intervention. Their perspective on the Royals uis not uniformly one of respect to them.

I'm not sure I agree with what she said, but I can understand her perspective.
I'm not saying she has to like or respect the monarchy, but as a highly visible person associated with a sport/company, I think it is inappropriate to publicly voice derogatory comments about the recently deceased, and it should not come as a surprise that your employer is unhappy about it.
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,336
Post Likes
1,440
I'm not saying she has to like or respect the monarchy, but as a highly visible person associated with a sport/company, I think it is inappropriate to publicly voice derogatory comments about the recently deceased, and it should not come as a surprise that your employer is unhappy about it.
I don't entirely disagree, but the entire narrative around Brenda's passing was hagiographic. which isn' the whole truth, and certainly is the oppoiste of some people's experience.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
I don't entirely disagree, but the entire narrative around Brenda's passing was hagiographic. which isn' the whole truth, and certainly is the oppoiste of some people's experience.
Are you calling her a dumb dog ?
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,336
Post Likes
1,440
Are you calling her a dumb dog ?
You're putting words in my mouth.

I'm certainly not a royalist, and I do, in principle, object to the abject fawning that has taken place.
 
Top