Graham,

Maybe it is the drunks, fornicators, etc, who are trying to avoid and misrepresent criticism. Yet many of us could be, or have been, multiple examples.

Then again, Power can be appropriated by money. Sponsors?? Surely not?

All in all those who are attacking Falau are attempting to apply Brandolini's law.

https://www.nature.com/news/take-the-time-and-effort-to-correct-misinformation-1.21106

The attack is asymmetrical to its validity.

This seems diengenious and seems to almost be like the author doesn't understand free speech? The Government is not jaling him, or abusing him for what he is saying.

Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences. His employer advised him not to offend thier sponsors, who pay him, and then he ignored them and did it again. So he will be dismissed. He knew this was coming.

He's free to keep stating his opinion and people are free to call him out on it, or agree with it. So quite the contrary free speech is being upheld. If I walk into a church and start saying all the Christians should be castrated, should I be able to, or should the church be able to boot me out? I'd suggest they have every right to boot me out.

Wether you agree with employment law, or what he's saying is another matter but don't conflate that with free speech.

Wise words, Graham. But, it's vicious out there and it will only get worse, I believe

I get it. There are consequences for those who choose to speak out, but not for those who choose to gag them. That's fair!

The obvious point Israel made was that all are sinners and without repentance and faith in Jesus Christ we are headed for hell. It is only the Christophobes who claim not to believe in Him that have made it a tolerance, homosexual, diversity issue.

Valley guy.

Your way behind the game.
It's easy to overturn your logic.
Folau, you say, was exercising free speech. That part is true. He was also exercising free will.
It is not the consequences in question here.

What is in question is who sets the penalty.
In this case Qantas. But that in itself is not exactly correct is it. It was an edict shunted down the line in Quantas, supporting the personal preferences and morality of the CEO,
who is a politically active gay rights campaigner.

If Folau did actually have a right to free speech, a penalty against him, (however coercive), would actually be illegal.

There is also another factor involved in this case, the deliberate confusion created by the libaterians, between Folau's condemnation of homosexuality, and its lack of direct personal attack.

So, under the rules created by Qantas, and largely supported by the uneducated anarchistic masses, such as youself, it is an unacceptable crime against a minority group to condem Muslims, Christians, bike riders, joggers, and any group considered morally superior my the majority! Loudest voice with the most influence wins, hands down.

Democracy is dead. Don't worry about God being dead.
Coincidentally, Democracy was born at the death of God.
The philosophical question for us now in the West is; what takes its place.

The answer is also obvious. Market forces through neoliberal policies of privatisation.
Dare not criticise, or you lose your privileges.
We are now totally ruled by private enterprise corporations divorced from any attachment to Democracy.
They are the Rulers of the entire economic Kingdom; we but the Serfs.

Dan.