LEGO,

<<Foxy, if your employer told you that you could not publically express any political and social opinion when you are in your own time, I'll bet you would be outraged. Yet you go into bat for Football Australia when it did the same thing to Israel Folau.>>

You stated this so well in your post. However, I wish you would not have been so insulting to those who base their religion on the Qur'an.

Can you imagine employees in ALP offices and unionists being forbidden from making Facebook or Instagram posts in support of the ALP or their Christian values? The same applies to any other political party or organisation that promotes certain views. It is accepted that an employee with Toyota will promote his/her product or Islam in the public square. There should be no blink about that.

But when Izzy comes out and includes homosexuals in his list of wrongdoers who need to repent, all hell breaks loose. I haven't heard the liars, thieves, atheists and adulterers kicking a stink against Folau.

Aidan says " he certainly was moral. It's what he believes". "Nor was it discriminatory; he wasn't treating anyone differently nor calling for anyone to be treated differently"

Well that is not true:believing in anything does not make it moral, And he was calling fro all those he was vilifying to go to hell,

coming to a library near you. I believe we have our Australian versions.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/500-mom-strong-group-leads-rally-against-drag-queen-story-hour?fbclid=IwAR2vFZssZem9iKrZ9D4YQrJVdmh2siMJpDE49BFUYLvZ8ouyhON4nLVPzR4

'“The Spokane Public Library South Hill has decided to host a ‘Drag Queen Story Hour’ on June 15th, at 2pm. This is misogyny; drag queens are very offensive to women. They are grotesque hypersexualized caricatures of women. They mock women and debase our womanhood and femininity. A drag queen is no different than a racist donning black face,” she continued.

yep these mums caring for there kids are real 'haters'.

Foxy, when morality is against you, you argue the letter of the law. When the law is against you, you argue morality.

Thank you Ozpen for your kind words.

LEGO,

I did not want to talk about morality regarding
the case of Folau. because I did not
want the discussion to tip over into the area of
vilification. Inevitably, it seems that this can't be
avoided.

The fact is, condemning gays (and others) to hell is
vilification.

Talking about morality? One of those attacking Rugby
Australia's code of conduct was Sydney's Anglican
archbishop Glenn Davies, who as David Marr points
out in his 27th June article for The Guardian, strongly
defended Folau's "right as a citizen to speak of what he
believes without threat to his employment."

This is the same archbishop who compelled 34 Anglican
headmasters and headmistresses last year to sign an open
letter demanding the laws continue to allow them to sack
gay teachers and expel gay students.

Marr suggests that there's one rule for religious schools
and another for the rest of society.

In other words, Folau should be free as a footballer to
vilify gays and others without losing his jobe but were
he coaching rugby at a Sydney Anglican school and tweeting
approval of gays it might see him shown the door.

If you are demanding rights for yourself which you
won't extend to others, that's not freedom. It's
privilege.

Marr tells us that we're now in the midst of this
pandemonium because Folau changed his mind.

For a $4 million contract he initially agreed to go easy
on denouncing, among other vices, the evils of
homosexuality. He traded his freedom of speech for money.

So, Marr asks why say yes in the first place and sign a
contract if that is such a profound violation of his
rights and his faith?

And why does he expect more millions from Rugby Australia
because he's copped the ordinary consequences now of
going back on his word?

According to Marr - it appears that Folau's target is
everything in this scenario.

If Folau were insisting on vilifying say Jews, Rich people,
women, the disabled, would anyone object to Rugby
Australia insisting he shut up about it?

Yes, lets talk about morality.

Foxy,

<<Rugby Australia terminated Folau's employment contract after a Tribunal determined his actions breached the organisation's code of conduct.>>

Again I ask, 'Have you seen the contract that forbids him from expressing his Christian faith in the public square?' Honestly, have you?

<<The offending behaviour was an Instagram post by Folau warning homosexuals (among others): "Hell Awaits You. Repent! Only Jesus Saves!">>

Why single out homosexuals when Folau mentioned many other sinners?

Would the LNP forbid its employees from promoting Christian values in public discussion or on Instagram? Which employer would write into a contract, 'You must not, when you are not on the job, promote your religion in public'?

I find it strange that Folau mentioned these sinners were going to hell unless they repented: Drunks, Homosexuals, Adulterers, Liars, Fornicators, Thieves, Atheists and Idolators. However, the homosexuals seem to be the loudest in objecting to Folau's values. Where are the liars? Why exclude others in this list of sinners?

Judgment is in the hands of the courts, and ultimately with God.