Israel Folau back

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,580
That's all true.

Personally I'm disappointed with the settlement. If Folau truly wanted to support other 'small people' and their right to express their religious opinions then he would have kept going to court.
Yeah, just shows he was always all about the money, IMO. I wish both sides had stuck with their principles. This resolution is very ambiguous and should be unsatisfactory to any thinking person. If RA's legal advice was as sound as they have claimes throughout the process, they should have seen this through.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Yeah, just shows he was always all about the money, IMO. I wish both sides had stuck with their principles. This resolution is very ambiguous and should be unsatisfactory to any thinking person. If RA's legal advice was as sound as they have claimes throughout the process, they should have seen this through.
I hold Raelene more accountable for this outcome than Israel. Only for the reason that she holds an extremely powerful position with a huge amount of responsibility on her shoulders. Folau is just an individual doing whatever he wants for himself.
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,739
Reaction score
27,950
Neither is a winner...but if RA have got rid of him and he can't play in their competition, then they've had the better outcome.

All Folau has is the money. RA still have upheld their values they speak of....monetarily Qantas will look after them and Aunty moved into their Board :grinning:
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,580
I hold Raelene more accountable for this outcome than Israel. Only for the reason that she holds an extremely powerful position with a huge amount of responsibility on her shoulders. Folau is just an individual doing whatever he wants for himself.
He's not though....he forgoes the right to be considered "just an individual" by presenting himself as a spiritual leader and supposedly a champion for the oppressed.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
He's not though....he forgoes the right to be considered "just an individual" by presenting himself as a spiritual leader and supposedly a champion for the oppressed.
I mean in a legal and corporate sense - Raelene is representing (supposedly) the interests of thousands or tens of thousands of people in AUstralia associated with Rugby.

Folau is representing himself.

But yes I also agree with your point that Folau did make it seem in the last few months that he was also representative of the 'quiet people' in Australia.

It's for this reason I'm disappointed that he's taken a settlement when he could have made a stand in court.
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,739
Reaction score
27,950
I mean in a legal and corporate sense - Raelene is representing (supposedly) the interests of thousands or tens of thousands of people in AUstralia associated with Rugby.

Folau is representing himself.

But yes I also agree with your point that Folau did make it seem in the last few months that he was also representative of the 'quiet people' in Australia.

It's for this reason I'm disappointed that he's taken a settlement when he could have made a stand in court.
Dawgfather could you explain in simple terms, the stand, in court, you'd have liked him to make pls?
 

086

Banned
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
1,476
Reaction score
332
I'm speculating here, yet take a stand equates to actually test the relevant legislation and set a precedent, hopefully in favour of the right for people's privacy from employers sticking their nose where it doesn't belong!
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,580
I mean in a legal and corporate sense - Raelene is representing (supposedly) the interests of thousands or tens of thousands of people in AUstralia associated with Rugby.

Folau is representing himself.

But yes I also agree with your point that Folau did make it seem in the last few months that he was also representative of the 'quiet people' in Australia.

It's for this reason I'm disappointed that he's taken a settlement when he could have made a stand in court.
That's kinda what Folau was doing when he played for the wallabies, which is why I think he would have lost the case.....bad we will never know. Weak from both sides, IMO.
 

Dawgfather

Banned
Joined
Nov 28, 2003
Messages
8,835
Reaction score
1,900
Dawgfather could you explain in simple terms, the stand, in court, you'd have liked him to make pls?
I don't know enough to give you an intelligent answer.

I can throw a few very rough ideas forward but I'm sure some of them are easily countered with some basic legal knowledge. I'm an accountant, not a lawyer.

- A company is not legally permitted to introduce into a contract a clause which acts to restrict an employee's ability to freely worship their own legitimate religion in their own free time
- An employee's expression of their genuine religious beliefs is not grounds for dismissal. Folau appears to me to treat everyone very kindly and equally, regardless of their sexual preference, skin colour or religion etc. The fact he has beliefs about some peoples sexual choices does not constitute vilification - it's just a belief.
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,739
Reaction score
27,950
I don't know enough to give you an intelligent answer.

I can throw a few very rough ideas forward but I'm sure some of them are easily countered with some basic legal knowledge. I'm an accountant, not a lawyer.

- A company is not legally permitted to introduce into a contract a clause which acts to restrict an employee's ability to freely worship their own legitimate religion in their own free time
- An employee's expression of their genuine religious beliefs is not grounds for dismissal. Folau appears to me to treat everyone very kindly and equally, regardless of their sexual preference, skin colour or religion etc. The fact he has beliefs about some peoples sexual choices does not constitute vilification - it's just a belief.
Thanks :grinning: Genuinely interested to discuss all the side issues. There's quite a few hey.

I totally disagree with employers sticking their noses into employee's private views.

RA's problem was that he publicly denounced homosexuality...when it's primarily accepted by the mainstream public now.

As an employee servant of his employer, the public persception of his views would carry over to RA if they had not done anything to make their inclusive views known.

I can't see anyway to resolve it whether it was in court or not myself.

Its all a personal view. Comes down to whether you think celebrities can say whatever they like perhaps?

Comes down to Folau also accepting that people who are gays, divorcees, liars etc should also expect to live a decent life without some high paid celebrity judging their lives and possibily causing some to suicide because of the judgement and public condemning that he stirs up.

If it was the Prime Minister saying gays, adulterers, liars and cheats are going to hell and the bush fires are because God is punishing you...would that be ok?

It's just not common decency to me to do that.
 

086

Banned
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
1,476
Reaction score
332
Thanks :grinning: Genuinely interested to discuss all the side issues. There's quite a few hey.

I totally disagree with employers sticking their noses into employee's private views.

RA's problem was that he publicly denounced homosexuality...when it's primarily accepted by the mainstream public now.

As an employee servant of his employer, the public persception of his views would carry over to RA if they had not done anything to make their inclusive views known.

I can't see anyway to resolve it whether it was in court or not myself.

Its all a personal view. Comes down to whether you think celebrities can say whatever they like perhaps?

Comes down to Folau also accepting that people who are gays, divorcees, liars etc should also expect to live a decent life without some high paid celebrity judging their lives and possibily causing some to suicide because of the judgement and public condemning that he stirs up.

If it was the Prime Minister saying gays, adulterers, liars and cheats are going to hell and the bush fires are because God is punishing you...would that be ok?

It's just not common decency to me to do that.
Don't have to agree with his opinion to believe he holds the right to one ;)
 

wendog33

Kennel Immortal
Premium Member
Ladder Champion
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
24,739
Reaction score
27,950
Don't have to agree with his opinion to believe he holds the right to one ;)
But you could be talking about public shaming of your lifestyle, morals. Next thing you have a witch hunt or burning at the stakes cos you're different.

One way or another, some one gets hurt.

Better, and kinder, to keep your views to yourself because he is a sinner himself with other biblical beliefs and rules, and not perfect.
 

Flanagun

Banned
In the Sin Bin
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
22,588
Reaction score
20,580
I am guessing he got 5 million.
I am guessing he got $5 worth of silver change and a new bible with all the passages about being non judgmental and tolerant crossed out.
 

Moedogg

Kennel Legend
Joined
Apr 6, 2012
Messages
13,459
Reaction score
20,285
Fucking Hypocrite.......a poor homosexual is probably closer to Jesus than this guy.
 
Top