News Folau case may send Rugby Australia broke.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,410
The thing is he isn’t forcing people to follow him on IG. He’s putting what he wants on his personal account. If people don’t like it then simply don’t follow him, it’s not like people NEED to be subjected to what he posts on there.
I definitely agree with that except for one main problem. On his account he constantly posted training shots, he listed himself as an Australian Rugby player, his account was linked with the rugby Australia account, and he is allowing people to follow him on Instagram.

If he set his profile to private and only accepted friends then it would be a completely different thing. It would be like the media outside the Bulldogs HQ with long range cameras and microphones at the end of the season.

But he didn't do that. His profile isn't private. He has it set to public so everyone can see what he is posting.
 

blueyedsamurai

Kennel Legend
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
11,321
Reaction score
2,554
He was asked to apologise this time too. He refused. That's why he was sacked. Repeated offences and refusing to apologise.
Still not really comparable, one is an opinion and for falau is his unwavering belief. I can understand him thinking if he apologized he'd be betraying god and for him that comes first over everything.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,410
Still not really comparable, one is an opinion and for falau is his unwavering belief. I can understand him thinking if he apologized he'd be betraying god and for him that comes first over everything.
They're both opinions, but it comes down to how strong your faith is.

For many religious their faith is unwavering. But as we have seen, some atheists are just as religious. People have many different beliefs. Ilan anti-theists strongly believes that religion kills people. A Muslim strongly believes that Christians are wrong about Jesus.

They are all opinions of different people with different beliefs. But to each individual that belief is the only truth.

Look at the politics today. The political supporters going crazy over their political beliefs. Each of them is probably right and wrong about 50% of their opinions but they believe it to be 100% true.
 

Memberberries

Desball 4 life
Gilded
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
22,345
Reaction score
2,675
@Hacky McAxe

You are on point about atheists being religious and having faith.

They have faith in the big bang theory and science.

Both of which have flaws!
Even the world's best scientist will tell you not to put all your faith in science and theories.
 

Bob dog

Hectik defence
Premium Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
19,324
Reaction score
3,564
Should the NRL shut down its ignorant pigs in a similar way?
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,410
@Hacky McAxe

You are on point about atheists being religious and having faith.

They have faith in the big bang theory and science.

Both of which have flaws!
Even the world's best scientist will tell you not to put all your faith in science and theories.
Definitely. There's different levels of it but the general problem is that many Atheists take what they learn from pop-science as faith that it's definitely true. But that's a massive mistake. The great thing about science is that it doesn't work with faith or absolute truths. It works with levels of probability.
 

blueyedsamurai

Kennel Legend
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
11,321
Reaction score
2,554
They're both opinions, but it comes down to how strong your faith is.

For many religious their faith is unwavering. But as we have seen, some atheists are just as religious. People have many different beliefs. Ilan anti-theists strongly believes that religion kills people. A Muslim strongly believes that Christians are wrong about Jesus.

They are all opinions of different people with different beliefs. But to each individual that belief is the only truth.

Look at the politics today. The political supporters going crazy over their political beliefs. Each of them is probably right and wrong about 50% of their opinions but they believe it to be 100% true.
I understand that but one is easier to just apologize about (you wouldn't even have to mean it) and the other is a bit more difficult if you feel like you're betraying your god.
 

Caveman

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 30, 2014
Messages
2,563
Reaction score
4,393
Latest on the case. :

- during the whole process Folau said that if his faith and post will cause problems for Rugby Australia and its sponsors then he'll walk away

- after losing he has now changed his mind and plans to appeal and if that fails, then he'll sue

- he has many legal backers that will sponsors his case, but they're trying to filter their sponsorship through the church to avoid paying tax. The ATO is now investigating it
Come on mate, your above that...

That summation is extremely misleading, and certainly is in no way a fair representation of the totality of events.

Not to sure if you are regurgitating what the media is spitting out or if this is your own take on events (hoping it's the former)....


It should be known that the below activity took place prior to Folaus latest contract.

"during the whole process Folau said that if his faith and post will cause problems for Rugby Australia and its sponsors then he'll walk away"

It should also be known that the ARU choose to recant (as such) any disciplinary action when Israel gave them the ultimatum.


The ARU (Castle in particular) became very diplomatic in the initial meeting after Israel offered to walk from the game and came to an understanding with Israel.

Raelene then came out a few days later and betrayed Israel by completely misrepresenting what was agreed to in the meeting.
 

Caveman

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 30, 2014
Messages
2,563
Reaction score
4,393
Haven't commented on Folau or this bullshit but I'll throw my 2 cents in...

Folau is not very smart and not a fisher of men that the Bible wants us to be. There are literally thousands of other passages he could of used to get his point across without sounding like a holier-than-thou loud mouth. If I were in his position, a simple quote like "Jesus loves and saves all" would be perfect.

PS with today's climate with Christians painted as the "bad guys" I would of love to see what the reaction would be if Folau were Muslim or Jew.
Have you ever heard or seen Folau preach?

I have, and although there are many things regarding doctrine that I totally disagree with him about, i will say that he does not have a "holier than thou" attitude (as a preacher or as a person).

A doctor is of no value until man realises he is sick, and a propitiation (or a "Saviour") is of no value until man knows he is a sinner.

The preaching of the gospel can not be watered down to "Jesus loves and saves all" because that is not true... The Bible does not teach that.

The Bible teaches that man can only be saved when he realises he has sinned against God, he turns away from that sin filled lifestyle, puts his trust in Christ, becomes a new creation in Christ - which is then made evident by the Christlike fruit in that person.

If a christian will not place a value on the very thing Christ's blood was shed for, what value does that place on Christ and Christ as a sacrifice?
 

Wolfmother

Kennel Legend
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
14,576
Reaction score
3,801
Screenshot_2019-05-19-06-35-44-34.png
Screenshot_2019-05-19-04-15-23-65.png
I literally shared scientific articles showing a genetic link to homosexuality. Each article had links to peer reviewed research supporting it. And you ignored it.

As I said on the post a few pages back. Read the research, not a right wing anti-gay blog.
I don't like to be annoying but.. The article you attached about a scientific genetic link to homosexuality is not conclusive the xq28 gene on the x chromosome in males is only suggestive, not all homosexual males have this chromosome and it doesn't explore whether this chromosome is present on heterosexual males. It just states from their studies that some had this gene. The gene is responsible for anxiety .
.

Therefore the xq28 found in some homosexuals is only symptomatic.. it's not evidence.
It's like saying a headache is a diagnosis.. It's only symptomatic to the cause

The article also infers it's still scientifically inconclusive by the use of preaching in its conclusion for social acceptance of homosexuality.
 
Last edited:

The DoggFather

OG DF
Premium Member
Gilded
Site's Top Poster
Joined
Sep 2, 2012
Messages
106,385
Reaction score
117,482
Have you ever heard or seen Folau preach?

I have, and although there are many things regarding doctrine that I totally disagree with him about, i will say that he does not have a "holier than thou" attitude (as a preacher or as a person).

A doctor is of no value until man realises he is sick, and a propitiation (or a "Saviour") is of no value until man knows he is a sinner.

The preaching of the gospel can not be watered down to "Jesus loves and saves all" because that is not true... The Bible does not teach that.

The Bible teaches that man can only be saved when he realises he has sinned against God, he turns away from that sin filled lifestyle, puts his trust in Christ, becomes a new creation in Christ - which is then made evident by the Christlike fruit in that person.

If a christian will not place a value on the very thing Christ's blood was shed for, what value does that place on Christ and Christ as a sacrifice?
I wonder if he has read the parable of the man with a branch in his eye...
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,410
I understand that but one is easier to just apologize about (you wouldn't even have to mean it) and the other is a bit more difficult if you feel like you're betraying your god.
That's true. But there's no reason Folau couldn't have said, "this is what I believe but I apologise if I offended anyone"

He actually said that exact thing last time he did it and everyone accepted that apology. This time he refused to apologise.
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,410
View attachment 10022 View attachment 10019
I don't like to be annoying but.. The article you attached about a scientific genetic link to homosexuality is not conclusive the xq28 gene on the x chromosome in males is only suggestive, not all homosexual males have this chromosome and it doesn't explore whether this chromosome is present on heterosexual males. It just states from their studies that some had this gene. The gene is responsible for anxiety .
.

Therefore the xq28 found in some homosexuals is only symptomatic.. it's not evidence.
It's like saying a headache is a diagnosis.. It's only symptomatic to the cause

The article also infers it's still scientifically inconclusive by the use of preaching in its conclusion for social acceptance of homosexuality.
There were two different articles I linked. The first one found that genetics played a role but couldn't find a strong link to the gene in the X chromosome. The second was a follow up study that stated that they couldn't find an X chromosome link but found other genetic links.

Here's the science mag article on the 2nd study which covers your points:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/10/giant-study-links-dna-variants-same-sex-behavior

"The researchers performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in which they looked for specific variations in DNA that were more common in people who reported at least one same-sex sexual experience. They identified four such variants on chromosomes seven, 11, 12, and 15, respectively.

Two variants were specific to men who reported same-sex sexual experience. One, a cluster of DNA on chromosome 15, has previously been found to predict male-pattern baldness. Another variant on chromosome 11 sits in a region rich with olfactory receptors. Ganna noted that olfaction is thought to play a large role in sexual attraction.

A much smaller 1993 study, which used a different kind of association technique known as a genetic linkage study, had suggested a stretch of DNA on the X chromosome was linked to inherited homosexuality. In the new GWAS, that stretch was not found to be associated with the reported same-sex behavior. But the lead author of the earlier study, Dean Hamer, then of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, praised the new work. “It's important that attention is finally being paid [to the genetics of sexual orientation] with big sample sizes and solid institutions and people,” he said. “This is exactly the study we would have liked to have done in 1993.”"
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,410
Come on mate, your above that...

That summation is extremely misleading, and certainly is in no way a fair representation of the totality of events.

Not to sure if you are regurgitating what the media is spitting out or if this is your own take on events (hoping it's the former)....


It should be known that the below activity took place prior to Folaus latest contract.

"during the whole process Folau said that if his faith and post will cause problems for Rugby Australia and its sponsors then he'll walk away"

It should also be known that the ARU choose to recant (as such) any disciplinary action when Israel gave them the ultimatum.


The ARU (Castle in particular) became very diplomatic in the initial meeting after Israel offered to walk from the game and came to an understanding with Israel.

Raelene then came out a few days later and betrayed Israel by completely misrepresenting what was agreed to in the meeting.
It's definitely not just a one sided affair. Rugby Australia and Castle did the wrong thing too. They handled the whole thing terribly. But Folau isn't in the right here.

He is free to have his beliefs but we're not a Christian country. We're a secular country that accepts all beliefs. Repeatedly posting things that you know offends others isn't a sign of acceptance. It's just saying, "my beliefs are more important than yours"

Everyone knows that's what he believes. But he doesn't have to force it on others.
 

Wolfmother

Kennel Legend
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
14,576
Reaction score
3,801
There were two different articles I linked. The first one found that genetics played a role but couldn't find a strong link to the gene in the X chromosome. The second was a follow up study that stated that they couldn't find an X chromosome link but found other genetic links.

Here's the science mag article on the 2nd study which covers your points:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/10/giant-study-links-dna-variants-same-sex-behavior

"The researchers performed a genome-wide association study (GWAS) in which they looked for specific variations in DNA that were more common in people who reported at least one same-sex sexual experience. They identified four such variants on chromosomes seven, 11, 12, and 15, respectively.

Two variants were specific to men who reported same-sex sexual experience. One, a cluster of DNA on chromosome 15, has previously been found to predict male-pattern baldness. Another variant on chromosome 11 sits in a region rich with olfactory receptors. Ganna noted that olfaction is thought to play a large role in sexual attraction.

A much smaller 1993 study, which used a different kind of association technique known as a genetic linkage study, had suggested a stretch of DNA on the X chromosome was linked to inherited homosexuality. In the new GWAS, that stretch was not found to be associated with the reported same-sex behavior. But the lead author of the earlier study, Dean Hamer, then of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, praised the new work. “It's important that attention is finally being paid [to the genetics of sexual orientation] with big sample sizes and solid institutions and people,” he said. “This is exactly the study we would have liked to have done in 1993.”"
Screenshot_2019-05-19-09-19-03-39.png





Even in this study there is no conclusive evidence. There are some similarities in genes but nothing identifiable to homosexuals because those genes are present in both homosexual and heterosexual people.

Anecdotally I do believe gay people are born gay because of certain common behaviour but I also believe using the same anecdotal observation that people can become gay .
 

Hacky McAxe

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Gilded
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
37,038
Reaction score
29,410
View attachment 10023




Even in this study there is no conclusive evidence. There are some similarities in genes but nothing identifiable to homosexuals because those genes are present in both homosexual and heterosexual people.

Anecdotally I do believe gay people are born gay because of certain common behaviour but I also believe using the same anecdotal observation that people can become gay .
Yep. They know there is a genetic factor from many earlier studies (which are referenced in these studies) but they still haven't found conclusive data to say how genetics influence.

I also doubt people can be born gay. Just born with a pre-disposition for it as I mentioned earlier.
 

blueyedsamurai

Kennel Legend
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
11,321
Reaction score
2,554
That's true. But there's no reason Folau couldn't have said, "this is what I believe but I apologise if I offended anyone"

He actually said that exact thing last time he did it and everyone accepted that apology. This time he refused to apologise.
I was going to say that but then I thought he'd think he was going against his faith, I guess we cant really know what he was thinking during that time. He certainly could of handle it better.
 

Caveman

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 30, 2014
Messages
2,563
Reaction score
4,393
That's true. But there's no reason Folau couldn't have said, "this is what I believe but I apologise if I offended anyone"

He actually said that exact thing last time he did it and everyone accepted that apology. This time he refused to apologise.
Totally agree, shows a lack of humility if anything.

Apologies and appreciation are two things lack greatly in today's society due to an abundance of pride.
 

Caveman

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Sep 30, 2014
Messages
2,563
Reaction score
4,393
I wonder if he has read the parable of the man with a branch in his eye...
... or a few words later (as it was a sermon, making it a decree not a parable) where Christ says "you will know them by their fruit as figs are not grown on thistles.... Enter by the narrow gate, for the way is broad that leads to destruction ... many (believers) will come to me saying "Lord Lord" and I will say "depart from me".

That scripture is the most contextually misquoted scripture in the Bible, I have no doubt Folau both knew and more importantly understood that passage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top