The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Is freedom of speech being denied

Is freedom of speech being denied

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 22
  7. 23
  8. 24
  9. All
from reports in the media, "Anti-gay comments made by Israel Folau continued to engulf Australian rugby on Thursday with players in New Zealand criticising the Wallabies back, while pundits castigated the country's governing body for its handling of the situation.
Folau, an Evangelical Christian, created a firestorm of controversy in Australia and rugby circles after he wrote on his Instagram page that gay people would be condemned to "hell" if they failed to "repent".
Posted by Josephus, Thursday, 19 April 2018 9:04:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Im suprised everyone is so shocked that a meathead thugby player is a bigot. Its not as if he is a beacon of educated thought or anything. He is just a short term nobody that will be forgotten as soon as his body craps out from the abuse.
Posted by mikk, Thursday, 19 April 2018 10:20:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Josephus, you confuse hate speak with freedom of speech. It is typical of these intolerant fundo Christians that they are full of love and kindness for their fellow man until their cup runneth over, so they claim. Yet on the other hand they want those they do not approve of thrown into a fiery cauldron for eternity, no half measures for these god fearing folk is there.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 20 April 2018 5:10:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It was once a crime to perform homosexual acts. That law had an element of forgiveness. The forgiving nature of the law allowed homosexuals to get on with life outside of the criminal act, and encouraged a change of heart and a chance to redeem themselves by becoming normal.

The law against homosexual acts was a wholesome one, it supported a conformity towards decency and respect towards a society based on Christian ethics.

Folau should be praised. Here in Folau, we have an example of youth that has a brain and is capable of thinking for himself. Folau has chosen a path in life of decency and self respect. All praise to Folau!
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 20 April 2018 7:19:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The emphasis here is not so much the act of homosexuality as the right to have an opinion and express it and the right to have opposite opinions. There will be those that want to close down any opinion opposite to theirs and create laws to enforce such. A free and democratic society is a society where civility rules in the face of opposing views. When businesses start representing exclusive opinion rather than their product, it starts fracturing the good will and economy of society. A society should be able to have Atheist Book shops as well as Christian book shops, and the right to advertise without threats. Countries whose laws exclude all but one opinion are totalitarian and heavy handed in enforcing their laws on opposing ideas. We can see this now happening in England, a once free society, as right wing political advocates are being imprisoned merely for holding a differing opinion.
Posted by Josephus, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:38:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is freedom of speech being denied?

"His comments were described as “very disappointing” by Qantas airlines, a major sponsor of Rugby Australia, while referee Nigel Owens, who came out as gay in 2007, said such remarks could contribute to young people taking their lives.

All Blacks scrumhalf TJ Perenara joined compatriot and fellow half-back Brad Weber in condemning the comments, saying they were harmful to those within the homosexual community who were vulnerable to mental health issues.

“You don’t need to look far to know that young Maori/PI (Pacific Islanders) are overrepresented in youth suicide statistics and, as I understand it, even more so when you look to those who are part of the Rainbow community,” Perenara said on Twitter late on Wednesday.

http://www.reuters.com/article/rugby-union-australia-folau-newzealand/rugby-folau-criticism-intensifies-ra-remains-under-fire-idUSL3N1RW2TG

"SUPER Rugby star Brad Weber has expressed his disdain at Rugby Australia’s decision to keep Israel Folau on the field in a series of furious tweets aimed at the controversial Wallaby

Weber said he “couldn’t stand” the thought of playing his sport with “people like Folau”."

http://www.news.com.au/sport/rugby/super-rugby-star-brad-weber-lashes-israel-folau-on-twitter/news-story/4cc1af525cc0256928d047a3adde6507

So, no, it doesn't appear that Weber or Perenara are being denied their freedom of speech. Do you think they should be, Josephus?
Posted by Toni Lavis, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:41:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just what does Israel believe that is so offensive see: https://www.playersvoice.com.au/israel-folau-im-a-sinner-too/#bsZdevWB3Lz2MGKu.97
Posted by Josephus, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:57:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Josephus,

Despite the remarks of big-time bigot and Christian hater, Paul, you are NOT confusing hate speech with freedom of speech. According to the likes of Paul, anything they disagree with is hate speech; and they want to stifle free speech wherever they can.

They would certainly like to deny us free speech, but they can't achieve that as long as we keep speaking out. The rugby player has done a great thing for freedom of speech and democracy, and the rugby hierarchy and Pooftas airline have come out of it looking like the bunch of fascists they are.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 20 April 2018 9:06:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//We can see this now happening in England, a once free society, as right wing political advocates are being imprisoned merely for holding a differing opinion.//

I assume you're referring to this case, Josephus, since it's the only one I can think of that comes close to fitting that description:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43478925

Technically, I'm not sure that training your dog to raise it's paw in response to certain commands can be considered political commentary.

And if you actually read the story, you'll discover that the bloke isn't some far-right nutter; he was just trying to wind up his girlfriend.

So much for the Old Bill rounding up Tories... who, I might remind you, are currently in Government in Britain. Do you really think a right-wing Government would give the courts power to imprison people for holding right-wing political opinions when they themselves hold right-wing political opinions? All of the DUP would be locked up straight away, Jacob Rees-Mogg would be given life without parole, and Comrade Corbyn would take Government.

I doubt even Theresa May would be willing to shoot herself in the foot to that extent.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Friday, 20 April 2018 9:06:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The ABC today gloats that an end to Folau’s career is nigh as he “defends anti-gay comments”. If this were to be the case, there could be no question that we now live in a fascist, anti-democratic society: freedom of speech has gone.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 20 April 2018 9:53:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
could not think of anything more unloving than to pretend that unrepentant sinners are not going to spend eternity without Christ. No brainer but the usual suspects who can't swallow truth want to demonise the messenger. Strange those that argue the bible is a myth go strong against its teachings. Hmmm!
Posted by runner, Friday, 20 April 2018 10:21:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I really have no idea who or what precisely Israel FOLAU has allegedly said, that's caused all the Gays to arc-up about it all. I've said before and I'll say again, back in the seventies we locked-up homosexual males for the crime of buggery. Now we are living in more enlightened times (apparently) and no such crime exists. But when some contributor's seek to abuse FOLAU for expressing his personal opinion, well I reckons it's pretty rich I really do. Seems we no longer have free speech in this country without suffering personal abuse.
Posted by o sung wu, Friday, 20 April 2018 12:20:05 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Josephus isn't pro free speech and those pretending he is don't understand his fundamentalist flawed logic on everything.

Paul correctly shows it is hate speech and against Jesus' teachings.

As soon as a supposed Christian(lol) makes a judgement of another human being they fail Jesus.

As soon as they attempt to correct someone to their loony beliefs they defy Jesus.

Matthew 7:1-5 "Do not judge others...." Every comment on another person involves some sort of judgement you Jesus failers...lol

Matthew 7:12 "Do unto others" I wonder if we examined Folau's life how well he would stack up?

If you wrongly believe homosexuality is sin

John 8:7: Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone...

So are all you believers and Folau free from sin?...OMG! Another epic fail - You obviously think you are sin free.

When a believer starts speaking on behalf of God and making statements on behalf of God their ego has gotten way too big!

Apparently God has the free will to make any decision, at any time, he feels like, but you believers take that away with your zealotry.

King David may well have been bi-sexual because of what the Bible says about his relationship with Jonathon.

2Samuel 1:26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.

Strange way of saying things...lmao

Daniel 1:9 Now GOD had brought Daniel into favor and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs.

A Prince is male...a Eunuch is male...and Daniel was male...OOPS!

But also note the verse states GOD had brought Daniel into favor and tender love with the prince of the eunuchs...GOD is omniscient...GOD therefore knew what Daniel and the Prince of Eunuchs would get up to...OR GOD isn't omniscient. Did GOD encourage the union?

GOD must have approved of this union or turned a blind eye to it at the very least! It occurs in Daniel 1 and there are 12 chapters in Daniel...so it didn't hold Daniel back!

Believers hearts are full of hate...admit it!
Posted by Opinionated2, Friday, 20 April 2018 1:17:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
o sung wu, copy and paste link I gave in my previous post. Here it is again. https://www.playersvoice.com.au/israel-folau-im-a-sinner-too/#bsZdevWB3Lz2MGKu.97 ttpn, I also recognise Paul as a Christ hater. He has not the debating capacity of the likes of bush bunny, who can disagree but does not turn to personal abuse of name calling and emotive hatred. Fact: The future of humanity relies on the raising of children. It is important to raise healthy children in mind, body and spirit if we are to have a healthy society. Currently human society in many aspects is in a hell hole of a mess and is not something we would celebrate.
Posted by Josephus, Friday, 20 April 2018 1:20:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is freedom of speech being denied?

Not yet.

While being at pains to convince the public that he (Israel
Folau) has no feelings of malice jtowards any group, that
he's merely true to his faith, his words and actions are at
direct odds with the sentiments of inclusion repeatedly expressed
by his employers. Now whether they will choose to silence
him - is up to them. I suspect that they won't as he's too
good a player and they probably can't win without him. He may
get a talking to, and if he wants to keep his job he'll learn
to tone things down a bit. It's up to him and his employers to
settle this.

We're all entitled to our own opinions. What we're not
entitled to - is go against our employer's wishes, not if we want
to keep our jobs. If I went around spouting off about things I
saw wrong to everyone - I wouldn't keep my job for very long.
It's all a matter of discretion, and common sense. There's a
time and place to voice your controversial opinions. It has
nothing to do with "freedom of speech." Freedom of speech -
does have certain limitations - as we all know.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 20 April 2018 1:24:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Op2, You are the height of hypocrisy, you do not follow through on things you use as authority to accuse others. Example Matthew 7:1-5 "Do not judge others...." Every comment on another person involves some sort of judgement you Jesus failers. BLIND
Matthew 7:12 "Do unto others" I wonder if we examined Folau's life how well he would stack up? Read his story!

John 8:7: Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone... :

What you do is endlessly in your previous rants, nothing but judge others with your blind to self ignorance.
Posted by Josephus, Friday, 20 April 2018 1:29:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Perhaps the Folau saga will find a place in The Australian Museum of Democracy?

https://www.moadoph.gov.au/

http://www.moadoph.gov.au/

One of the above links has had the 's' of 'https' removed; guess which one
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 20 April 2018 1:35:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy, Israel has not expressed hate toward any player or done damage to the rules of his game. He has merely expressed his faith position. The fact is in his faith position most of the players are sinners and going equally to hell. He would state they as he was equally a sinner; if you read his story all are going to hell [see link]. For him it is a fact to turn away from a selfish unrepentant life and accept the life Jesus offers as this leads to heaven.
Posted by Josephus, Friday, 20 April 2018 1:42:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Only dumbed down or dishonest scientist get gw jobs and uni positions. Now they want to sack the best rugby player because he answers a question with truth. The god haters are really haters of truth.
Posted by runner, Friday, 20 April 2018 1:43:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OMG Josephus you get sillier by the second...

Saying "I believe in Jesus" is stating your faith position NOT speaking on behalf of God. WAKE UP!

Once again you believers defy Jesus'teachings with every post!

Matthew 7:3-4 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

How's that forest of trees in your eye Josephus?

You believers pretend free speech when you defy Jesus by making judgements in your hate speech.

What are you scared of Josephus...Scared like many in your church of choice you might be a little bit gay also...lmao

It's OK you can't catch it...lmao Or are you bi-sexual but refuse to acknowledge it?...lmao

Jesus contradicts you continually Josephus...but you are too blind to see it...

Mark 10:31 But many that are first shall be last; and the last first.

All you believers who speak on behalf of God, judging others defy Jesus over and over. So you guys don't like homosexuals..get over it!

Neither you or any believers have the right to state who goes to heaven based on your total lack of Biblical knowledge you simply wouldn't know!

But let's say hell is true...All you believers who continually defy Jesus and lie so profoundly will be in hell first!

You believers continually cast stones and judge changing

Matthew 7:1 JUDGE NOT, that ye be not judged.

The command is "JUDGE NOT!"

To

Matthew 7:1 YES! Judge everyone, so I can judge you. And I, as a delusional believer and defier of Jesus shall tell you if you are going to hell or heaven.

Jesus' teachings don't support you Josephus
Posted by Opinionated2, Friday, 20 April 2018 2:14:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Josephus...I'm not a Christian so how can my showing you where you are insane be hypocrisy? WRONG AGAIN AND STILL DUFUS!...lmao

You are the one who would loudly proclaim you are Christian and yet you continually defy Jesus...by judging others and casting stones...So you as usual you are the hypocrite.

Once again you just defied Jesus...Shouldn't you have turned the other cheek?...lmao EPIC FAIL!

Yes here it is...Matthew 5:39...But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

So let me slap you on your other cheek hypocrite...lmao

You should stick to reading every version of the Bible like you lied about and stop commenting on stuff you are continually wrong about...

I hope you repented that huge lie you told...lmao

Under Jesus teachings you as a prentend follower simply have to

Matthew 7:1 JUDGE NOT, that ye be not judged.

Matthew 7:12 "Do unto others"

John 8:7: Not cast stones unless you are free from sin

Matthew 5:39 Turn the other cheek

But once again you fail to practice what you preach...

So have you got a particular part of hell you would prefer? The sulphur lakes perhaps? Or the eternal fires? Are you practising gnashing your teeth?...lmao

So why are you so keen to believe all the horrid lies against God and to continually defy Jesus Josephus?

Matthew 7:3-4 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Should I send a forest removalist to assist you with those trees in your eye?...lmao

WAKE UP SINNER!
Posted by Opinionated2, Friday, 20 April 2018 2:36:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//One of the above links has had the 's' of 'https' removed; guess which one//

It's the one without the 's', right?
Posted by Toni Lavis, Friday, 20 April 2018 2:45:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Toni,

Your perceptiveness continues to amaze me.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 20 April 2018 5:01:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Seeing Josephus is such a champion of hate...oops...free speech I thought I'd prove you believers wrong again...lmao

Who was the disciple Jesus loved and why wasn't he named?

John 13:23-26...ONE OF THEM, THE DISCIPLE WHOM JESUS LOVED, was reclining next to him.

Simon Peter motioned to this disciple and said, “Ask him which one he means.”

LEANING BACK AGAINST JESUS, HE asked him, “Lord, who is it?”

He then LYING ON JESUS' BREAST saith unto him, Lord, who is it?

What did this disciple and JESUS have a cuddle fest? Is this natural?....Why isn't he named?

It's definitely a HE!

Now again, because of the lack of detail in this verse this could mean Mary or another disciple.

John 21:20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth THE DISCIPLE WHOM JESUS LOVED following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?

Who was the disciple that JESUS loved? I thought he loved them all. What is going on here?

John 20:1-2 The first (day) of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and TO THE OTHER DISCIPLE WHOM JESUS LOVED, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

Strange happenings indeed!

John 21:7 Therefore THAT DISCIPLE WHOM JESUS LOVED saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt [his] fisher's coat (unto him), (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea.

There definitely appears to be a disciple whom JESUS loved more than the others. Why would it be referenced if it means nothing?

Now of course maybe this is how JESUS reacted to his disciples. Maybe they all snuggled up during dinner.

The problem is it keeps referring to "THE DISCIPLE WHOM JESUS LOVED.

Don't tell me..OMG!...DON'T TELL ME...Suddenly the 144,000 virgin males Jesus will hang with might make sense...lmao
Posted by Opinionated2, Friday, 20 April 2018 5:02:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Josephus,

I agree with you that Israel Folau probably did not intend
to upset people intentionally or bring hurt to the game.
However, as I stated in my earlier post - his words and
actions are at direct odds with the sentiment of inclusion
repeatedly expressed by his employers. And, that's
something that they will undoubtedly deal with. It will be
interesting to see the end results (if any). Perhaps this
will just simply die down on its own.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 20 April 2018 7:19:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Victorian Green perv, Greg Barber, has resigned from parliament.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 20 April 2018 7:32:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn, wrong once again, I am not a Christian hater at all. Christians are free to assemble, believe what they like, pray to their unseen god. all that warm and fuzzy stuff they go in for. They can even sing 'Kumbaya' to their hearts content as far as I am concerned. If a true Christian should ever lob onto this forum we can all have a wonderful time discussing love and happiness. In the mean time we will just have to put up with the fraudulent bunch that get their rocks off with vile hate speak claiming they are also Christian. They know who they are!

Bigoted, you sir are the master of the forum bigots, hating every minority that is not to your liking. This Folau claiming to be a Christian, condemned others who in no way impact on his well being. Folau condemned gays to an eternity of pain and suffering in the wretched place he calls hell, for no other reason than they are homosexual. Nice bloke!
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:05:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy, What does ones sexual preference have to do with the rules of the game? To deny a person the right to play his sport because he sees something totally irrelevant to the sport as important to his beliefs of life, it is a clear imposed denial of freedom to hold an expressed opinion. It is the LGBTQQS lobby intent to close down expression by respected citizens who do not hold their views. Society is not allowed to hold a No case in spite of 40% expressing such. Their voice is to be silenced is the view of a totalitarian society. Try China or North Korea or Iran for freedom of expression.
Posted by Josephus, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:06:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Victorian Green perv, Greg Barber, has resigned from parliament." Ttbn

I'll keep an eye open and see if he pops up naked on a push bike in Byron Bay.
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:17:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul1405, Obviously you have not read Israel's life as I posted, nor understood his point of view. He holds no animosity to any person in his league, unlike the vitriol you post here. He holds that once he was headed for an eternity in Hell because of his sin before his conversion. I do not have to justify Israel, his story does that.
Posted by Josephus, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:21:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//To deny a person the right to play his sport because he sees something totally irrelevant to the sport as important to his beliefs of life, it is a clear imposed denial of freedom to hold an expressed opinion.//

Funny, Josephus, I can think of plenty of footballers who've been sacked because of things totally irrelevant to the sport, and you've never seemed to be bothered about it before. Are only some sorts of freedom of expression to be cherished and protected?

Where was all your confected outrage when poor Todd Carney was sacked for being photographed pissing in his own mouth? Pissing in your own mouth has nothing to do with the rules of football. If Carney wants to express himself by being photographed pissing in his own mouth, shouldn't he have the right to do so? Even if it's offensive to a lot of people, and not something they'd support?
Posted by Toni Lavis, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:37:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Josephus, like others who hold dogmatic religious beliefs, you want to impose those beliefs onto everyone else. Anyone who disagrees, you have the ultimate punishment, your hateful vengeful god is going to condemn these sinners to an eternity of suffering. How sick are you people.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:48:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You raise an excellent point, Toni.
Behaviour that has nothing to do with the game should be something quite separate and irrelevant as long as it's not criminal.

Pissing in one's own mouth is an admirable feat, on a physical basis, though not to everyone's taste.

I am reminded of the furore over the private video where some NSW Police were critical of aborigines and the two athletes who went to a firearms range/gun store in the US, these two broke no laws but were hauled over the coals in the Australian media.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 20 April 2018 8:54:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul, Josephus like all religious zealots are very sick and they prove it with every post.

They simply can't sell love and so they sell fear and hidden withing the fear is the hate in their hearts.

No-one has the right to decide on behalf of God who goes to heaven or who goes to hell or state their opinion for that matter because their opinion always involves judgement.

They won't address the fact that Jesus used to have a bloke lying on his chest at meals. They won't address why that person wasn't named. They are in full denial about the hate in their hearts.

If there is a God ...God is nothing like they try to sell.

Daniel was probably gay... King David was probably bi-sexual, Methane John of Patmos was probably gay...

They need someone to hate... Watch them jump at this and get it all wrong. Jesus is talking about gays in these verses...

But Jesus says this

Matthew 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

Eunuchs were gay men because often they castrated gay men in their evil system.

Jesus accepted some were born gay so that makes gayness from God...lmao

The believer hatred and bigotry towards gays is simple showing their horrid hearts continuing to defy Jesus'teachings.

They obviously don't follow Jesus... I have proven Josephus doesn't...lmao
Posted by Opinionated2, Friday, 20 April 2018 10:35:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Op@,

I like your reasoning and your logic, it wouldn't look bad in a PhD on alternative thinking.
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 20 April 2018 10:54:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

Just saying “Christians are free to assemble, believe what they like, pray to their unseen god. all that warm and fuzzy stuff they go in for” doesn't mean that you don't hate Christians. Of course they are free to do these things, and you hate them for it. You are always denigrating them.

And, simply retaliating by calling me bigoted does not negate your own bigotry. You are definitely a bigot, no matter what I am. You will always be a bigot; nothing you say about me, true or otherwise, will change what YOU are. It's fine to call me a bigot. I might be bigot. But that won't change your obvious character, nor will it excuse you. I happy with what I am. I hope you are happy with what you are, because you aren't going to change. Remember, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot etc. all felt as good about themselves as you do about yourself.
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 21 April 2018 12:04:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A Jewish Eunuch of whom Jesus spoke was one who abstained from all forms of sex because they believed it made them unclean, not one that engaged in anal sex [a very unclean practise]. Read the Dead sea scrolls on purity. They were obsessed with purity and washings as they lived in caves in the desert from which John the baptizer emerged, washing in the Jordan. Jesus raised differently first appeared blessing a wedding in Cana with wine and was later accused of eating food without washing his hands.
Posted by Josephus, Saturday, 21 April 2018 6:12:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In the US a while ago there was commotion about a man disrespecting the nation by not standing for the national anthem. He apparently did this as a sign of protest over police abuses. The issue grew and grew, and had more people take one side of the issue or another.

Long story short, in the aftermath nothing substantial happened except that the sport was dragged through the mud and people being sick of the debate that was once their pastime entertainment, said that politicizing a sport will only harm it.

Take a warning from this. For those of you who want to continue to watch rugby and not have it about freedom of speach/religous rights verses politically correct/offended censorship; then make it an early appeal before rugby snowballs into a focus for other debates. Make it known that rugby is the main focus of rugby, and that other issues about the players, or their politics and beliefs are not the main focus of the game.

I don't watch too much of either sport, but I have an opinion on the issues that are being addressed in both situtions. If you like watching your sport, then make sure that people like me who aren't intreasted in it as much aren't bogging the sport down because of politics and issues people support. Because a lot of people will flood in about this rugby issue who don't give two hoots about rugby on any other day.
Posted by Not_Now.Soon, Saturday, 21 April 2018 6:30:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It was once the reasoning of Christians that black people did not go to heaven, by virtue of the fact they didn't have a soul, the rationale used to justify slavery. Where did they go? Folau is not white, and there are still probably some good ol' boys (god fearing Christians they be) down south who think all nigs will burn in Hell, Folau included.

In 1452 and 1455, Pope Nicolas V (Christian) issued a series of papal bulls that granted Christians the right to enslave sub-Saharan Africans. Church leaders argued that slavery and the Christianizing influence served as a natural deterrent to paganism, preventing barbarous behavior among pagans. On all religious matters the Pope is infallible, so teaches the Catholic Church.
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 21 April 2018 7:10:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn, you misunderstand the meaning, and what it is to be a bigot. A bigot is someone who is intolerant of the opinions and/or beliefs and practices of others. In the case of Christianity I am not intolerant of their beliefs or practices, In fact I hold many of the same beliefs. For example those Christians that believe "love thy neighbour" hold the same belief as me.
The fact I take issue with the Catholic Church (an organization) and organized religions in general, does not make me a bigot. Your irrational and total hatred of all Muslims shows you are extremely prejudiced, but it does not make you a bigot.
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 21 April 2018 8:03:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

I misunderstand nothing. I agree with your definition of 'bigot', and it describes you to a tee. Your “irrational and total hatred of (Catholics) … makes you a bigot. Your assertion that I am “irrational” - while you are not – makes you a bigot. You also thing I'm a bigot. So be it. You obviously cannot 'get' my comments about Hitler, Mao and Pol Pot (let's throw in di Natale). None of us can ever be completely free of the belief that we are right, and everyone else is wrong. It's called 'human nature', and the trouble with the Left is that you think can manipulate natural instincts our of existence, just like you think that you can change nature by putting electricity prices!
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 21 April 2018 9:32:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul you do bring up some nonsense. One of the first Gentile Christians mentioned in the NT was an Ethiopian as black as any person on Earth Acts 8: 26. Jesus said to the disciples go into all the Earth and make disciples of every nation. He did not exclude persons of dark pigmented skin. You are desperate looking for fools to accuse.
Posted by Josephus, Saturday, 21 April 2018 9:54:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Josephus,

People are entitled to their religious beliefs and to
express them.
However, this is not about religious beliefs. This is
about stopping people from having the same rights as
the rest of us. The right to marry, and so forth. It's
about inclusion - and being treated
the same as anyone else. People are entitled to their
religious beliefs, what they are not entitled to is -
to discriminate against people because of those believes.
For example - "I won't serve you in this restaurant because
you're black, a Muslim, or a Jew." " You can't play sport
with us because you're gay." "You can't marry in this
country because you're gay." That's discrimination.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 21 April 2018 11:51:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Josephus you are wrong again...about Eunuchs...

That's because you are wrong about everything and totally miss the point.

A homosexual doesn't have to engage in anal sex.. It isn't obligatory...lmao You seem an expert on the subject... Didn't you enjoy it?...lmao

See once again your indoctrinated brain knows nothing!

When a child in those times was thought to be effeminate or homosexual they were operated on to make them Eunuchs. At that point they couldn't have any genital sex.

But making them Eunuchs didn't change the sexuality...It just destroyed their abilities.

So your false statements don't change anything.

Many were homosexual at birth and therefore homosexuality is 100% natural for a small percentage of our population you bigoted fool!

Even bi sexuality is natural as they were born that way also.

I was born heterosexual and there is nothing I can do to change that...It is natural!

For such an unenlightened moron you sure have a lot of opinions...ALL WRONG of course.

So you read the Dead sea scrolls enlightened now from a little piece of unbigoted knowledge that I just taught you.

The reason they used Eunuchs was because they simply weren't attracted to women (homosexual) and they couldn't do anything sexual.

Indoctrination leads to bigotry Josephus and you overflow with both...lmao
Posted by Opinionated2, Saturday, 21 April 2018 12:20:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Left are very good at inventing 'rights', most of which 'rights' are just something they want to do.
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 21 April 2018 12:55:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

". On all religious matters the Pope is infallible, so teaches the Catholic Church."

Wrong again.

Op2,

"I was born heterosexual and there is nothing I can do to change that..."

Yes, there is, broaden your mind and I can direct you to some places that will help you change.
Might stop you laughing for a bit though.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 21 April 2018 2:36:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
News Flash for atheists like me - there is no hell. There isn't a heaven either. There aren't any gods.

But if anybody thinks there is/are, that's up to them. That's their opinion. They're as entitled to it as I am to mine. Of course, they may have to argue for it, just as atheists like me should be prepared to theirs.

Perhaps, as some posters here suggest, as a rugby player, he should have no opinions about anything except rugby. Perhaps, likewise, climate scientists should be the only people allowed to haver opinions about climate science. Perhaps only women should have any opinions about women or feminism. Only people who have committed domestic violence should have opinions about that too. Perhaps only novelists with direct experience of something should be allowed to write about it. Perhaps we should all retreat to our own little dung-heaps and speak of nothing that doesn't affect us - and even then, only to other people in our particular dung-heaps.

Is that how 'free speech' works these days ? i don't think so. Kiss my hairy arse.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Saturday, 21 April 2018 3:09:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Now lets see. Australian rugby has players who have been charged with rape, who have been caught doing drugs, beating women, cheating on wives, caught up in orgies and who do the left vent their bile to? They pick on a man who disagrees with their perverted views. What a small minded bunch of bigots the hypocritical left are.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 21 April 2018 3:10:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear runner,

When you refer to other people's views as "perverted"
it doesn't speak well of your own or of the "freedom
of speech" that you're supposedly supporting.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 21 April 2018 3:49:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I note we are descending into the subject of homosexuality rather than the right to hold an opinion about. Does a person have a right to have an opinion on say Mariana or alcohol and its effects to the human brain when the majority of the population hold it is normal to use. If you happen to offend a user you must be silenced because you are expressing hate. Foxy, You are way off the mark with this comment, "However, this is not about religious beliefs. This is about stopping people from having the same rights as the rest of us. The right to marry, and so forth. It's about inclusion - and being treated the same as anyone else." This is not about the homosexual marriage debate, but is it right for 40% on religious grounds to hold a different opinion and the right to express it. According to you they have no right to hold such a view or the right to express it. According to you there is only one view allowed in this Marxist totalitarian State and it is yours. All other views are hate.
Posted by Josephus, Saturday, 21 April 2018 4:19:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Josephus,

Defence of free speech should not only be for those we
agree with.

Of course Israel Folau is entitled to his religiously
influenced views. However even Anglican ministers have
stated that he should have paused before posting on
such a public forum. The responsibility that attaches to
freedom of speech is the responsibility not to use one's
words or one's position to hurt others. Folau as a role
model and national sporting star should have thought
better than air a view like he did on a public stage
like social media. He was in a position to reach a wide
audience and his speech would carry more moral weight
than an ordinary person in the community. He has to ce
careful not to abuse his responsibility with the freedoms
he's given.

Folau chose to put the word "hell" into capital letters, which
is widely interpreted as the online equivalent of yelling.
Words can as we know hurt and hurt badly.

Yassmin Abdel Magied's comments on Anzac Day caused a great
stir. She probably now would know better. Hopefully Mr Folau
will learn the same lesson.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 21 April 2018 4:45:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That’s a terrible analogy, Josephus.

<<Does a person have a right to have an opinion on say Mariana or alcohol and its effects to the human brain when the majority of the population hold it is normal to use.>>

I don’t know who this Mariana is (sounds like a bit of a hussy, if you ask me), but alcohol is demonstrably bad for you, and people who drink it have a choice about whether they drink it, and those who find it difficult to stop drinking it have a problem - and one that is treatable at that.

The question of whether a conscious choice is normal, I think, comes a distant second to inherent traits that cannot be helped and that one did not choose.

<<If you happen to offend a user you must be silenced because you are expressing hate.>>

Here, you highlight yet another difference. People tend not to hate people who drink alcohol - at least not collectively as a society as they have done so where gays and blacks were concerned. Some prefer not to be around drinkers, but there has never been any systemic discrimination of drinkers (at least not that I’m aware of), and drinker-bashing was never a favorite pastime of the older generations when they were young, back in the good ol' days when people actually had respect for others. (Hang on a sec...)

On no level is expressing disapproval of those who consume alcohol (or this random woman of whom you speak, Mari-what's-her-face) analogous to demonising people for traits they cannot help, whether that be sexuality or skin colour or what have you.
Posted by AJ Philips, Saturday, 21 April 2018 5:03:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy, So homosexuals, rapists, thieves and atheists can clearly state there is NO HELL, but you cannot post there is a Hell for unrepentant sinners. So only one view can be posted. So you cannot express a personal view of what you hold as sin. That denies the right of those that believe sinful behaviour has eternal consequences to express it. Atheists should not be concerned as they do not believe in life after death, or ones life has eternal consequences; but they are the most zealous to deny others their right of difference.

AJ, Does Folau demonstrate violence or abuse exclusively toward homosexuals in his game or on the street, which you seen to imply is criteria of hate? Can you say he hates homosexuals in his sport? If you know his views you would see all persons are going to hell because they are sinners unless they repent of their sins.
Posted by Josephus, Saturday, 21 April 2018 5:29:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

I believe that the person being lambasted for airing his views would know much more about true Christianity than "Anglican ministers" (priests, actually) or most other practitioners of the established church. It is the established church that has sold out in their attempts to be relevant to people who actually hold them in contempt.
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 21 April 2018 5:36:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Josephus,

What we are talking about here is a person who is a
role model for young people, who has the capacity to
reach a wide audience and whose speech carries more
moral weight than any other ordinary person in the
community who has failed to appreciate the special
responsibilities he carries as that role model for
young people.

The responsibility that attaches to freedom of speech
is the responsibility not to use one's words or one's
position to hurt people.

Folau chose to single out gay people and to put the
word "hell" into capital letters, which as stated earlier
is widely interpreted as the online equivalent of yelling.

Considering his position he has to be careful not to abuse
his responsibilities. As the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney
Glenn Davies stated, "I would say, always think twice
before you write on social media."

In other words, be respectful. Apply some common sense.
We're all entitled to our opinions. But most intelligent
people would apply discretion as to when and how we express
those opinions. It's also good manners to think before you
speak, and how you speak. Very few people would stand
outside a mosque and shout, "Terrorists!" at the top of their
lungs. Or for that matter very few homosexuals, rapists,
and others, would also espouse their views outside
Christian Churches either. And there would be consequences
if they did. People need to champion the responsibilities they
take on just as much as the freedoms they are accorded.

A bit of common sense and decency never goes astray.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 21 April 2018 6:14:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think that depends on how one defines “abuse”, Josephus.

<<Does Folau demonstrate violence or abuse exclusively toward homosexuals in his game or on the street, which you seen to imply is criteria of hate?>>

I didn’t mean to imply that they were the criteria for hate. Hate is a feeling. They would, however, demonstrate that feelings of hate exist.

<<Can you say he hates homosexuals in his sport?>>

(Why just in his sport?)

No, I can’t. However, if he believes that gay people are deserving of Hell (a distinction I made at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19678#348708), then I think it would be safe to assume that he hates them.

<<If you know his views you would see all persons are going to hell because they are sinners unless they repent of their sins.>>

I made a similar observation:

“According to this idiot, most of us are going to hell for one reason or another.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19678#348699)

I’m more interested in whether he thinks they deserve it, though.
Posted by AJ Philips, Saturday, 21 April 2018 6:19:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh my god! ttbn is being bigoted against established churches! Is Folau's church a mobile one on wheels towed around by enslaved black homosexuals? This is enough to turn one to drink. What's needed is a good bad woman, Fr Joe do you have the number of that Mariana chick!

I rang!

Oh my god! My world is shattered, the worlds greatest soccer player Mariana is gay!

Issy, can you please check with the Pope on this, he's unbelievable when it come to religious matters!

Oh god! it bloody hot down here in HELL (note the bloody capitals, I'm yelling, you would to if your arse was on fire), can someone please turn up the air con for us 7 billion sinners! AJ a cold beer wouldn't go astray either!
Posted by Paul1405, Saturday, 21 April 2018 6:31:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The fantastic thing about these threads, started by dimwits like Josephus, is that all the troglodytes of religion jump in showing their bigotry, their hatred, their lack of knowledge and their lack of any moral fibre, whilst still having the audacity to call themselves Christian.

Jesus would be so proud!

But even more fantastic than that is people like the reasonable educated people amongst us can actually prove them wrong over and over again.

Their lying claims to follow Jesus are proven over and over to be totally false...lmao

The saddest part is that Josephus claims to be a Bible scholar...lmao It's more likely that he filed Bibles in the Vatican library and one accidentally fell open and he thought that made him a scholar for all he knows...lmao

One of his more inglorious lying claims is this...Josephus claimed to "have read every verse in the various translations of the Bible over 40 times in my 77 years".

How many translations of the Bible are there Josephus...Come on fess up that is BS! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Bible_translations

He claimed to have read...EVERY verse...in EVERY translation... OVER 40 times?

Sadly for Josephus I knew it was a lie and pointed his moral ineptitude out to him...

These believers make the following errors...they

Say who will and won't go to heaven...lmao

Quote the Bible wrongly and get caught out continually...lmao

Prove continually that they don't follow Jesus...Josephus failed these on this thread alone http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8228#255866

Don't object to...lying to and indoctrinating children, scaring children with lies of Satan and hell, falsifying their credentials and belief, altering the Fact that Bible heroes were Psychopaths, manic depressives and liars and undermining God totally with their beliefs.

Religion is a mental illness and these liars are mentally ill. The facts prove it over and over again.

Sadly they will use hate speech and hide behind the free speech argument to justify their bigotry and hatred.

We all must continually question, the claims of these people claiming to be religious or Christian, because their claims never stand up to reasonable analysis.

On here they fade to dust before our eyes...lmao
Posted by Opinionated2, Saturday, 21 April 2018 7:20:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

"Issy, can you please check with the Pope on this, he's unbelievable when it come to religious matters!"

You made the statement, it's up to you to back it up; or are you going to do the usual and weasel out?
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 21 April 2018 8:37:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//I note we are descending into the subject of homosexuality//

Funny, that seems to happen a lot when you're around, Josephus. Just sayin' ;)

//According to you they have no right to hold such a view or the right to express it. According to you there is only one view allowed in this Marxist totalitarian State//

So, dragging this conversation away from the scintillating and titillating subject of homosexuality and back to the subject of freedom of expression: some questions for you, Josephus. Was it the work of the Marxist totalitarian state you claim we live in (pardon?) when Todd Carney was sacked for expressing himself in a manner that was stupid and offensive but neither criminal nor sinful? If not, why not? Or was his sacking justified simply on the grounds that his behaviour was so grossly stupid and offensive? If you feel that Carney's sacking was warranted, could you please explain why you believe that to be the case?

And have you managed to come up with any answers I posed to you last night on this subject, which you ignored? They weren't rhetorical.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Saturday, 21 April 2018 9:13:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8228#255886

//So homosexuals, rapists, thieves and atheists can clearly state there is NO HELL, but you cannot post there is a Hell for unrepentant sinners. So only one view can be posted. So you cannot express a personal view of what you hold as sin.//

Yeah, that's not how twitter works, Josephus. I don't use the platform but I've still seen/heard plenty of tweets quoted elsewhere, and from what I've observed it's obvious that you have quite a lot of freedom in what you post on Twitter. Considerably more than you do on OLO, for example.

//That denies the right of those that believe sinful behaviour has eternal consequences to express it.//

No, as far as Twitter is concerned they have all the right in the world to post that.

But if you post something that your employer takes a dim view of, you might find yourself in trouble. If a woodwork teacher at a Christian private school was to start tweeting that it's OK to be gay, that a woman should have the right to choose, and that Dungeons & Dragons is actually quite a lot of fun, Twitter wouldn't care. But I daresay the headmaster would show them the door pretty quickly even though their personal views have nothing to do with woodwork - and as a religious school, they'd be exempt from the normal anti-discrimination laws that would make it an unlawful dismissal.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Saturday, 21 April 2018 9:15:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//"On all religious matters the Pope is infallible, so teaches the Catholic Church."

Wrong again.//

For those of you playing at home, the correct answer is that the Pope is infallible when "he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility

But I really doubt that there are many people - even among Catholics - who actually believe the Pope is infallible. It's just one of those weird bits of Catholic dogma we like to make fun of them over. And mostly, they're pretty good sports about it because they also realise that Catholicism has some downright silly traditions. Mind you, so does everybody else.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Saturday, 21 April 2018 9:31:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks Toni, I'll buy that.

As the forums only confessed member of the one true apostolic church, that being the Church of Rome, The Catholic Church. I would just like to reiterate my fervent belief as the Holy Father in Rome, not this Holy father but a previous Holy Father, had pontificated; "All Protestants will burn in HELL!" unless of course they repent their evil ways and renounce their sins and join with us the true believers.

Its all up to you fellas.

BTW; who said this Israel Falou is such a great shakes as a Rugby player, our Wanabes regularly get thumped by those gay loving All Blacks. Disgraceful, if not down right sinful. Rugby is the game played in Heaven, so they say.
Posted by Paul1405, Sunday, 22 April 2018 7:56:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bad news, Paul: there is no Hell. There is no Heaven. There's not even a waiting-room.

So how can anyone get upset about what Folau said ? Yes, all those homosexual Christians of course and homosexuals of other faiths too. Devout Muslim homosexuals must torment themselves with what the Koran says about it all. Hindu homosexuals must pray that they'll come back as some other species which tolerates homosexuality, maybe as chickens or donkeys or Khaki Campbells.

But I suspect that quite a few homosexuals are agnostic or atheist, so it should be like water off a duck's back, nothing more than a bit of a joke. But the bottom line is that, of course, we are all, each of us, entitled to our opinions, provided we can defend them rationally and civilly, without degenerating into ad hominem attacks, which are always a sign of weakness-of-argument. Wouldn't you agree ?

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 22 April 2018 5:53:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

So you really didn't mean your "kiss my hairy arse"
comment on page 8 then.

Good to know.
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 22 April 2018 6:14:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dearest Foxy,

Them that tell don't know, and them that know don't tell :)

Love,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Sunday, 22 April 2018 6:17:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Them that think they can, and them that think they can't,
are right. (smile).
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 22 April 2018 6:59:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hell is definitely inclusive.
Posted by runner, Sunday, 22 April 2018 7:40:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

"As the forums only confessed member of the one true apostolic church, that being the Church of Rome"

Wrong again, it's becoming a habit.
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 22 April 2018 8:18:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ttbn, the following links may explain the "creeping fascism" that has been a worry for me over the past few years here in Australia particularly.

Under Fuhrer Howard we saw the most repressive series of legislation enacted since Federation barring the White Australia Policy. Since then we have seen the continuation of Howard's legacy with Fuhrer Abbott and more recently the formation of Border Force and their black uniforms. Almost within months, we saw in several jurisdictions, the adoption of black uniforms by state & territory police forces. All worrying trends if you put this in context with the legislation that preceded it.

The premise that to gain security we surrender basic human rights to freedoms is nonsense, we never had those "freedoms" in Australia. For the best we have ever been is as a Crown Colony of the British Royalty...nothing more than the provider of wool for uniforms, iron ore & coal for the furnaces of the Empire to hammer into rifles, guns and canons so that we support the Queen &the President of the USA on their imperial crusades, wherever they may be. The long dead of the Glorious 102,000 would be spinning in their graves

Added to this we see the emergence of the Third/Fourth Wave Radical Feminism and Neo Conservative agendas via the never ending Land Rights for Left Handed, Lesbian Aboriginal Harp Seals brigades and their incessant racket. Forcing children into compulsory Gay Tolerance lessons at age 9 in our public schools when all at the same time banning Christmas festivities because we might "offend" little Abdul in grade 4 is just more of the fascist rot in another guise.

The second link refers to Trump, but I feel that it is the Neo Cons/ANTIFA who draw this conclusion of him, but he may in time, be proven to be a greater POTUS than what he portrays in his current role. Trump is certainly erratic and unusual in his style, unpredictable to many.

1. http://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/fasci14chars.html
2. http://predatorrights.wordpress.com/14-characteristics-of-fascism/
Posted by Albie Manton in Darwin, Sunday, 22 April 2018 9:49:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Issy, you bombed out on he infallibility line, see Toni's post. Shame on you. Don't tell me you are one to.

Joe are you the Pope? there is no hell, there is no heaven. You might be right on that one. But to say there is no god's waiting room, that's blasphemy. I was there today, its called the RSL.

"Hell is definitely inclusive" runner, glad you're been included. Is there any chance you could sent us up another first hand report, like how's the heat down there, have you got a suntan, met any friends, been introed to Old Nick yet. Thanks for the first one from down below, looking forwards to others as you learn you way about the place.
Posted by Paul1405, Sunday, 22 April 2018 10:09:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Meh, y’all heathens are arguing over how the deckchairs were arranged while the Titanic was going down, when it comes to Catholicism.

Anyone who knows anything about Christian theology knows that Catholics are all going straight to Hell in the Devil’s handbasket anyway. The fact that they interpret John 14:6 wrong and have a church hierarchy (unbiblical) ensures that.

The only ones going to Heaven are the Lutherans.

Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and Baptists are all Calvinists. The Church of England was only started so that Henry VIII could have a sinful divorce, and they don’t believe that God exists anyway.

"Do you believe in God?"
"No, we're Church of England."

Anything goes with the Uniting Church, with their female ministers (1 Corinthians 14:33-35) and their homosexual ministers ‘n’ such. The Jehovah’s Witnesses are a cult. And Mormonism? Well, lets just say that if Christianity had it's own Spaceballs spoof, Mormonism would be it.

As for the happy-clappy churches that the likes of Folau and runner attend? They practice a shallow brand of worship with their rock music and their hand-swaying. And their so-called "speaking in tongues" is nothing short of witchcraft.

As for Folau, even if he didn’t belong to the so-called "Church of Christ" (a misnomer if I've ever heard one), his tattoos would ensure his damnation anyway (Leviticus 19:28), given that he appears to be completely unaware that he should be seeking repentance for them.

Heck, they may as well be directions to the Gates of Hell.

Don't get angry at poor Izzy. Pity him. He's on the Highway to Hell too, and practically overtaking every homosexual along the way.
Posted by AJ Philips, Sunday, 22 April 2018 10:32:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

"Issy, you bombed out on he infallibility line, see Toni's post. Shame on you."

What Toni posted was exactly what you should have posted, had you done any research;
you said, "On all religious matters the Pope is infallible, so teaches the Catholic Church."

Toni said, "... the correct answer is that the Pope is infallible when "he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church."

See the difference?

Are you going to do some research on your preposterous claim that "... the one true apostolic church, that being the Church of Rome", or will Toni have to rescue you again?
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 22 April 2018 10:51:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Issy, are you saying faith and morals are not a religious matter. Define religion; it is a system of faith and worship, it includes morality. If not what defines religion, what brand of alter wine to use. The religious sure spend a lot of time talking about faith and morals as a religious matter, including the Pope.

BTW; A Papal Bull is decree by the Pope on matters concerning the Catholic Church, and when doing so the Pope is speaking from a purely religious point of view, supposedly.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 23 April 2018 6:30:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Again I am amused at what I read. The question is;Is freedom of speech being denied? The answer is, very obviously, YES! PC has been hi-jacked and massaged into a completely different meaning than when it was first spoken. PC came about so that people like pollies could say something yet carry a totally different meaning. (ie; lie) It was their way of 'pulling the wool over our eyes'. It had nothing to do with being respectful or not insulting anyone. The idea that you must not say something because it 'might' insult someone or 'hurt their feelings', is not acceptable or even allowed in a free and frank debate/discussion. I've said it before, if you succumb to the PC fallacy, you will be engaging in a fictional conversation not a factual one. Therefore the whole conversation is moot and therefore irrelevant. I cannot stress it enough, we must be honest when discussing/debating, and not allow emotions to contaminate the facts. It is a fact that by doing so WILL deliver a wrong outcome. I note that some people speak in defense of what they perceive as the mentally weaker/vulnerable. I understand. I also understand that in life their are many things that affect these people daily. By those of us not afflicted with this problem, not using PC is not going to help one way or another. We must not be swayed by these pro PC arguments. We must be true to the discussion and the pursuit of the truth, no matter who may feel a little discomfort along the way. Outlawing PC is the first step to regaining the right to freedom of speech.
Posted by ALTRAV, Monday, 23 April 2018 8:18:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

"Issy, are you saying faith and morals are not a religious matter"

I know that you are not so dumb as to think that all religious matters are to do with faith or morals; for example, when the Pope of the day decided that the Mass could be said in the language of the local people he was not speaking on a matter of faith or morals but on a matter of procedure, that was not binding on the whole Church but was, never-the-less a religious matter.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 23 April 2018 9:09:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Q&A on the Catholic website;

Q, Why was the Latin Mass forbidden, but now allowed?

A, It was misinformation, Pope Benedict went out of his way to report that the old Missal was never forbidden.

Issy I also included the word worship, and clearly the language of the mass, the procedure, is covered by the broad term worship. Why did you leave out the word worship, didn't fit your argument.

As for a Papal Bull, such a document carries far less weight and authority today than it did a few hundred years ago. Then it was incontestable, it was binding on all Catholics, even kings, and failure to comply could lead to excommunication and death. On the positive side, for those that a Papal Bull was favourable to, it gave them authority to do as the Bull so dictated, with impunity.
Posted by Paul1405, Monday, 23 April 2018 10:20:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

One difference between you and the Pope is that he issues Bulls but you just sprout bull.

What has 'worship' got to do with the fact that you got it wrong and Toni supplied you with the facts?
How are you going on "... the one true apostolic church, that being the Church of Rome"?

Found out where you are wrong yet?
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 23 April 2018 10:42:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//Found out where you are wrong yet?//

Ooh! Sir! I know, sir!
Posted by Toni Lavis, Monday, 23 April 2018 12:09:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, tell him!
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 23 April 2018 12:15:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Eastern Catholics, sir! They're Catholics, but not members of the Roman Church.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Monday, 23 April 2018 12:38:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's right, Toni, and you can have an early mark tomorrow or, if you prefer, on Friday.

You could have made your answer more complete by referring to the different traditions of the Catholic Church as 'Rites' but as they are all Eastern Rites then you are correct.

Gold Star.
Posted by Is Mise, Monday, 23 April 2018 2:37:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

I'm an atheist, that's my right in a democratic society. Folau is a believer, and that's his right in a democratic society. I'm not particularly offended by his comments, they spring from his beliefs, as my opinions spring from mine. We both have the rights to our beliefs and to their expression in a democratic society. We are both able and allowed and free to express them no matter who we offend. Even if I were somehow offended by his observations, that shouldn't count for anything in the arena of free expression. Wouldn't you agree ?

Clearly, many homosexual believers may get upset, since, like Folau, they probably believe in a hell. Whether they would dispute what he says but would like to suggest that their book says otherwise, is up to them to work out between them, it's a sort of internal matter. They are also free to express their opinions and to argue for them. In a democracy, everybody should be free to honestly argue out their opinions.

And without any bullying from big business: money shouldn't hold sway over opinion in a democratic society; money shouldn't be able to silence anybody, I'm sure you should agree.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 23 April 2018 2:38:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
the bad news

(1Co 6:9) Surely you know that the wicked will not possess God's Kingdom. Do not fool yourselves; people who are immoral or who worship idols or are adulterers or homosexual perverts

(1Co 6:10) or who steal or are greedy or are drunkards or who slander others or are thieves---none of these will possess God's Kingdom.

the good news

(1Co 6:11) Some of you were like that. But you have been purified from sin; you have been dedicated to God; you have been put right with God by the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Posted by runner, Monday, 23 April 2018 3:56:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Runner,

Does it offend or upset you that some of us aren't believers ? Would you campaign to have us silenced or jailed ? I'm happy to support your right to believe what you like and to let others know it, in return for my right - and Paul's too - to do the same :)

Seriously, I'm just wondering. Does un-belief offend you ? To the point where you would like it banned and its adherents silenced in some way ? Or would you support everybody's right to express their beliefs freely ?

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 23 April 2018 4:02:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Loudmouth

I am saddened by unbelief but not offended. The offer of eternal life is for all. People can mock, ridicule or whatever. Unlike Marxist thought police people can choose their own belief system based on reason, irrationality or ignorance. You can't 'force' someone into believing or following Christ. People have tried that with bad results just like the left shove their irrational garbage down people's throat (eg you are born that way).
Posted by runner, Monday, 23 April 2018 4:12:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks Runner,

I was just trying to establish the boundaries of who is, and who isn't, in support of freedom of speech. So in that sense at least, I'm honoured to suggest that you and I are on the same page :)

In a roundabout way, this relates to the Good Samaritan parable, which i believe is probably the most wonderful story, true or not it doesn't really matter, in the bible. Would Christ support the freedom of expression today ? I think so. Would he have supported the head of the multinational capitalist firm, Qantas ? Maybe not, but he would certainly have empathy for him. And supported his right to his point of view, as you and I do.

On the other hand, to give him some credit, would Marx ? I think so too, i think he would have learnt a lot since 1883. They both would have so much to offer in terms of human values.

Best wishes,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 23 April 2018 5:30:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wonder what Jesus would make of Todd Carney weeing in his mouth.

Marx too, for that matter.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Monday, 23 April 2018 6:36:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Toni,

God almighty, as an old person, I still can't get used to how quick you can find information. This would have taken an entire day thirty or forty years ago. Using Google, it took about a minute.

In relation to Mr Carney peeing in his own mouth, you could check this:

http://www.betootaadvocate.com/headlines/pissing-in-my-own-mouth-was-a-victimless-crime-is-todd-carney-the-nrl-scapegoat-3/

I'm not sure of the connection to this thread: are you suggesting that, being rugby players, both Folau and Carney committed some sort of equivalently heinous crime ? Does Todd Carney have the right to piss into his own mouth ? Not being a lawyer, I would naively suggest that yes, he does, if he wishes: such fetishes don't harm anybody else, after all. But I suppose, from your perspective, this all has something to do with freedom of expression, but perhaps on another, much lower, level.

Perhaps we could start a campaign, in support of Todd Carney's right to piss into his own mouth ? Perhaps Get Up ! could raise funs for it. And a protest march. Imagine the slogans: 'Whadda we want ? 'To piss in our own mouths !' 'When do we wannit ?' 'NOW !'

Then at least some of us could get back to the more important business of defending each other's rights to genuine and meaningful freedom of expression, hopefully at a somewhat higher plane.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Monday, 23 April 2018 6:56:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Watch it Issy, I'll have the Popey fire his Missal at you! Then you'll know it! Anyway, Wombat season is over, did you take out the Tony Azzi Memorial Trophy for the third year running? Next week sees the start of the unofficial Koala Blast, as declared by the Shooters and Hooters. Bag yourself a swag of the fury varmints before they are all gone.
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 4:58:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

You shall stay in after class on Thursday for trying to be funny and do 300 lines; " I must not mock, nor slander, my betters.".
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 7:57:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//You shall stay in after class on Thursday for trying to be funny and do 300 lines//

But sir, he'll just copy and paste. I think you should make Paul pick up litter in the playground, sir. He's a greenie, he'll enjoy it.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 8:05:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi paul,

Gosh, it's fun to take any argument that one disagrees with to a ludicrous extreme. And also to divert discussion any way one can.

Look, a unicorn ! Over there !

So what are the issues that need to be examined on this thread ? A person's right to express themselves, and their obligation to deal with any criticism of their opinion. We all have those rights and obligations. Any chance you can get back to those issues ?

Nah. Unicorns are more fun.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 9:37:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Would he have supported the head of the multinational capitalist firm, Qantas ? Maybe not, but he would certainly have empathy for him. And supported his right to his point of view, as you and I do.'

Personally Loudmouth I think Jesus would of offered Alan Jocye eternal life. I don't think he would care to much that he is the head of a multinational capitalist firm. It seems to me its the marxist who envy those who had 'made it' in the coporal world. Many of those that envy seem to be in highly paid government jobs. They would not have earned half the amount in the real world.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 9:48:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loudmouth, finally someone noticed that this conversation went off topic, and quite a while back. The only thing that might be rescued from where the discussion is now, is if somebody points out that because it is about freedom of speech, they are free to choose what 'speech' they wish to engage in. I personally would prefer it to stay within the guidelines of the subject matter, and I believe the over-riding point here is Political Correctness. Now this is where we begin with our freedom of speech being denied. I don't know how, but someone hi-jacked the meaning of PC to be about not hurting other people's feelings. Rubbish! PC is nothing more than sugar coating a lie. It's no different than someone telling someone to 'get stuffed', but with a smile. I for one will not sugar coat my comments as history on this medium, and others, will show. If people cannot have a free and frank debate/conversation the end result will be moot, and the whole thing was a waste of time because the result will not be true. You cannot influence a debate with emotion. If someone is offended by what is being said, that merely shows a high level of immaturity on the part of that person and it is irrelevant to the debate. If in the course of the debate the tone goes into the gutter then, so be it, the conversation then is held in the gutter, as long as we are aware of it then let it be so. Bearing in mind by doing so we are then off topic.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 10:09:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Alt-Rave,

Maybe our resident expert on logical fallacies, A. J. Phillips, can add No-Offensiveness to his huge collection: the 'Non Offendite' argument. Since offence didn't seem to worry the Romans, I've had to make up a Latin name for this new fallacy, which is surely telling.

Offending has been with us for perhaps thousands of years - Aristophanes even mocked Socrates in his plays more than 2400 years ago. Socrates was probably very offended, but copped it sweet. Voltaire ridiculed philosophers in 'Candide'. Moliere mocked all and sundry in his plays. Some of the best literature is viciously cruel, and great fun.

I realise that young people these days are much more frail, that offence can cause them terrible anguish but .....

Suck it up, snow-flakes.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 10:26:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Loudmouth, hear! hear! that's more like it. Anyone offended by your comments can look away. That shouldn't be too hard, even for the the snow flakes. I am in disbelief as to why a majority of a population have to watch their 'P's and 'Q's, to cater for a childish or immature minority. As long as we can 'speak our minds' freely, we have played our part in a conversation. We are, after all, duty bound to speak the truth or say what we think or believe. If in doing so offends; irrelevant! So be it.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 10:40:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe,

If you think that just offending someone could be a logical fallacy, then I’m afraid you haven’t quite grasped what a logical fallacy is yet.

http://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-logical-fallacy-1691259

If the person doing the offending is doing it in lieu of a rational argument, then it would be a fallacy. But we already have a name for that. It’s called the ad hominem, and it has nothing to do with how the person on the receiving end feels about the offence.
Posted by AJ Philips, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 10:42:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I’m still stuck on the fact that, had a celebrity singled out an entire race as being destined for such hideous and immoral treatment, then their censure would not be controversial. But because it’s gay people who were spoken about, suddenly free speech is under attack.

That, and the amusing irony to fact that Folau, too, is going to Hell for being black.

The joke’s on him, but he can hardly be blamed for that. He comes from a group of people who have one of the lowest levels of average IQ in the world. That’s why they’re so religious.
Posted by AJ Philips, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 11:03:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ,

Is that what you mean by an 'ad hominem' ? Do you have evidence whatever that Polynesians have lower intelligence than yours ? Why on earth do you suggest that sort of rubbish ?

Or, in the spirit of this thread, are you trying to be offensive for its own sake ?

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 11:16:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes, Joe, technically that’s an ad hominem.

<<Is that what you mean by an 'ad hominem' ?>>

But it’s not the fallacious kind because I didn’t say it to evade dealing with an issue put before me. I more just threw it out there.

<<Do you have evidence whatever that Polynesians have lower intelligence than yours ?>>

Actually, I didn’t say they were lower than mine. But I’ll take that as a compliment.

http://aristocratsofthesoul.com/average-iq-by-race-and-ethnicity

<<Why on earth do you suggest that sort of rubbish ?>>

Because it’s true. You’re not in favour in suppressing the truth just because it’s not PC are you?
Posted by AJ Philips, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 11:44:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry, AJ, you lost me at .... "But it’s not the fallacious kind because I didn’t say it to evade dealing with an issue put before me. I more just threw it out there."

I'm supposed to have a fairly high IQ, so clearly IQ is unreliable as a measure of anything, except perhaps there ability to do IQ tests (I've done about four, I think). Even Herrstein and Murray (much more than Burt and Eysenck before them) also pay attention to such factors as class and culture (cultural capital, cultural imperatives). And as the author of your article says, "Lumping people into a group and judging them based solely on skin color is the definition of racism, and everyone should be judged as an individual. "

One could suggest, to get even further off the track of this thread, that length of settled life and recency of migration, might have impacts as well. Anyway, that's all many other issues for other threads. Unless, of course, you are suggesting that Folau's religious beliefs are a function of, or are in some way related to, his intelligence ? Since you provide no evidence (he's always seemed quite intelligent to me), I'll assume that you were just being flippant.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 12:56:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ as far as your reference to PC goes, well done. As for all that stuff about fallacies and so on, mate I don't give a flying flee about getting too deep in breaking down PC. What your link eludes to is confirming my stance on PC. If I want to insult or offend someone, I will not sugar coat it or shy away from the veracity of my point. By the same token I reject any person or laws that restrict or forbid me to say what I think/feel. For example, it is a falsehood and a total miscarriage of justice to stop a shop owner or any business from serving someone they don't want to serve. If the person has a problem with this shop owners beliefs or principals or just outright opinions, too bad. The shop owner must express them or he will be mis-leading the public to go against who HE is. The same way, it is said, you cannot legislate against queers, so also must you not legislate against someone who rejects queers. That is his right. (Please don't take this thread back to making it about the queers, I am only using it as an example as it seems the commentors on this topic have a lean towards queers). The customer has the right to rebuke the shop owners comments and go elsewhere. So clearly, under current laws and opinions, freedom of speech IS being denied.
Posted by ALTRAV, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 1:20:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No problem Joe, here's one for runner.

runner, when Jesus ascended into Heaven, did he fly QANTAS? Did he cash in his 'Frequent Flyer' points. Just asking.
Posted by Paul1405, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 5:43:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Toni,

He won't just copy and paste; Miss Grimm will be supervising and she told me that she has found some old steel nib pens and some ink powder and an inkwell. She's going to let Paul mix his own ink.

That will be such fun!!
Posted by Is Mise, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 7:51:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have some good news for you, Joe.

Despite it being popular amongst you and your PC mates to denounce IQ tests as meaningless, a proper IQ test conducted by a psychologist is actually quite accurate, provided one pays attention only to the scores for each individual category. The overall score is problematic, and a good psychologist will be reluctant to reveal it.

The biggest problem with IQ tests, though, is that they don’t test for other forms of intelligence such as emotional intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and intrapersonal intelligence, which are just as important.

Unfortunately it appears your token black friend, Folau, is seriously lacking in these departments too. It’s just as well knuckle-dragging apes like him are good at footy, eh? Meanwhile, the rest of his kind are out knocking off cars and breaking into houses. Fat lot of good their Christianity is doing. Although, if they ditched the religion, their IQ might go up a few points.

http://www.livescience.com/59361-why-are-atheists-generally-more-intelligent.html

A regular bunch of geniuses, that mob. Come to Logan here in greater Brisbane and you can experience firsthand the culture of the South Pacific. It's a real treat.

<<Even Herrstein and Murray (much more than Burt and Eysenck before them) also pay attention to such factors as class and culture (cultural capital, cultural imperatives).>>

Yes, I've heard all the excuses before.

It's a real chicken-and-egg problem, isn't it? Does their culture make them dumb, or do they have a dysfunctional culture because they're already dumb?
Posted by AJ Philips, Tuesday, 24 April 2018 9:59:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ, This is clearly character defamation not fact and you might need to prove such. "Unfortunately it appears your token black friend, Folau, is seriously lacking in these departments too. It’s just as well knuckle-dragging apes like him are good at footy, eh? Meanwhile, the rest of his kind are out knocking off cars and breaking into houses. Fat lot of good their Christianity is doing. Although, if they ditched the religion, their IQ might go up a few points."
Posted by Josephus, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 8:47:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Issy. as I have told you many times, I received unbiased religious instruction in the virtuous way of Catholicism from good Sister Mary an old Irish nun, and I kid you not, she was a tough old bird! But she knew all there was to know about religion.

"some ink powder and an inkwell", obviously you went to one of those trendy, lefty, politically correct progressive schools, also known as a State School, we were not allowed to use ink until 4th class, it was pencil (HB) or nothing. Bet you didn't even use a "slope card", for your running writing, such moral degradation, Pagan, worse still you could even be C of E!

AJ, you can have a reasonable IQ and be crazy, look at me, my score was 132.
I've got whanau living at Browns Plains, been to the Logan Markets, lots of "Coconuts" there.

It's a real chicken-and-egg problem, isn't it? Does their culture make them dumb, or do they have a dysfunctional culture because they're already dumb?

Why are gays generally more intelligent than straights, and Singaporeans are the most intelligent people on the planet, Engineers by occupation, and women are smarter than men. So therefore a female gay atheists named Edith, being an engineer from Singapore, is the smartest person in the world. However, William James Sidis (April 1, 1898 – July 17, 1944) is possibly the most intelligent person who ever lived, and he was none of the above, as far as I know.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 8:50:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Btw, William James Sidis died of a stroke at the age of 46 as a reclusive, penniless clerk.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 8:53:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As nice as it’s been to feel like part of the gang for the last 24 hours, joke’s over.

Of course I’m not serious. I have literally hundreds of posts to OLO’s self-professed racist discrediting this sort of ignorant rubbish.

I feel like there was supposed to be a moral to all that, but I got so caught up in the character that I’m not sure what that was anymore.

Although, what I said about IQ tests is still true. I also genuinely think that Folau would score low on interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence. Interpersonal, because he could have worded his response in a far less offensive way; and intrapersonal, because it takes a serious lack of self-reflection to understand what a belief in Hell says about one’s self.

--

Paul,

Interesting point about the IQ gay people. Now that I think about it, I don't know of a single gay person that I could, in any way, describe as stupid.

A slight correction, though. Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ, and there is no difference in IQ between men and women on average. Women, however, tend to be clustered around the middle while me are more spread out along the spectrum. So, while most geniuses are men, most people of low intellect are also men.
Posted by AJ Philips, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 10:14:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Aj and Paul demonstrate perfectly why the swamp needs to be drained.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 10:26:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ahhh, it's good to be back on the other side.
Posted by AJ Philips, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 10:41:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

"... we were not allowed to use ink until 4th class, it was pencil (HB) or nothing. Bet you didn't even use a "slope card", for your running writing,.."

You're out of fourth class, not far, but ...

We didn't have slope cards but exercise books with / every few word spaces.
I learned to write on a slate but after developing a descent running hand I switched to a cursive script, which is a much better form of hand writing,
The much taught, in the past, 'running writing' is really an engravers' method and not suited to normal writing as it quickly degenerates into a scrawl without constant self discipline.

This is relevant to the topic as poor writers, that is scrawlers get chosen to be doctors; MDs that is.
Posted by Is Mise, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 12:42:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry runner, my mistake, obviously Jesus would have flown 'Virgin' Airlines, get the connection, virgin, ah, wink wink.

AJ, I once asked gay friends, "Why are you gays so smart?" The answer; Well Paul, while the others boys we outside kicking a RUGBY ball, we were inside hitting the books." That sure beat the HELL out of me.

"Exercise Books" Issy, Issy, Issy, a member of the privileged class! Exercise books. I bet you even had a Fountain Pen! You lucky, lucky bastard! All I had was a pencil, and it had a broken point! Boo hoo, too bad, so sad.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 3:52:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

Pencils ! Jesus, we used to dream of pencils. We had to draw with a finger in the mud, while the 'teacher' was flogging us with tree branches.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 4:20:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe, you lucky, lucky, bastard! Teachers pet were you! Oh, what I would have given to be flogged with a tree branch! Oh no, it was the strap and cane for me. I learnt my Catechism! Yes sir re, I learnt that god was kind and merciful to us poor 7 year old retched sinners. Sister Mary made sure we knew how kind and merciful god was, she belted it into us with her strap! Can't be fairer than that.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 6:57:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

Well, yeah, but usually we had to suck and crawl just to get into the school grounds, on the off-chance that we might get taught something. Capitalist schools forced us to fight each other, bare-knuckle fights over thirty rounds, the boys too, so that only one out of every five of us kids could ever eventually even get into the grounds, after running through a gauntlet of rich kids, often there headmaster's kids, with baseball bats. If we were lucky, we could compete annually for the one pencil made available, but only if our parents did unpaid work on the plantations.

I still remember dreaming about a pencil, just a stub of a thing, about 3 cm long and no real lead inside. Since our parents, or their parents, had never had pencils, it was obviously just a cruel fantasy.

On the other hand, we might have been poor but we were happy.

By the way, my singing group sang He Ihowa Atua this morning in front of around a thousand people: very moving. Beautiful.

Aroha,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 7:56:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//We had to draw with a finger in the mud, while the 'teacher' was flogging us with tree branches.//

Drawing in the mud with your fingers? Luxury...

We used to dream of havin' mud to draw in. Aye, and fingers. We used to have to draw with our toes, in t' puddle of blood from our fingers being chopped off first thing every morning.

And you tell t' young people of today that, and they won't believe you.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 8:19:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Why is everyone avoiding the current topic? I can't believe what I'm reading. There is talk of IQ and all manner of material foreign to the topic in question. I feel like the teacher trying to bring the classroom back to the lesson. Will somebody please say something about freedom of speech, or at least why we are being denied the right to practice it. And when you do, please consider that PC is a major player in our being denied freedom of speech. Thank you. Jeez.
Posted by ALTRAV, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 8:26:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Toni, you lucky, lucky, bastard! Another teachers pet! Not only did we have our fingers chopped off, we had our toes chopped off as well. Then we were forced to recite The Lords Prayer backwards, and if you got it wrong you were kept in at play lunch, and didn't get your treat, that was getting to eat our own fingers and toes. Some people had all the fun.

Joe, we did the same thing Sunday avo and again this morning, sung "Our Heavenly Father... and the rest of the New Zealand National Anthem in Maori and English followed by the Australian National Anthem. This avo we were invited to a pub to celebrate ANZAC Day with a bunch of mostly young Kiwi's with a NZ band playing all the favourites from back home, along with lots of Aussie ones as well. Only stayed a couple of hours, it was packed, and most had been drinking all afternoon, so were well on the way.
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 8:56:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//Why is everyone avoiding the current topic?//

Wow, really? You've never seen the Four Yorkshiremen? It's a comedy classic, ALTRAV. That's like not having seen Fawlty Towers. Here's the joke:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlIXn0r0AY8

//Will somebody please say something about freedom of speech//

How about instead of re-hashing the theory for the zillionth time, we go straight to the practical by exercising our free speech to talk a load of old toot and not having what we should be talking about dictated to us by a twat?

//And when you do, please consider that PC is a major player in our being denied freedom of speech.//

OK, quick opinion poll: is it politically incorrect to call retards retards?
Posted by Toni Lavis, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 9:30:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OK Toni, fine, you want to play. I get it. Your exercising your right to freedom of speech by not sticking to topic. Well then, how about those Yankees Eh?
I thought they did pretty well, but I'm not so sure now. Ah well, maybe next game.
Posted by ALTRAV, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 10:28:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//Toni, you lucky, lucky, bastard! Another teachers pet! Not only did we have our fingers chopped off, we had our toes chopped off as well. Then we were forced to recite The Lords Prayer backwards, and if you got it wrong you were kept in at play lunch, and didn't get your treat, that was getting to eat our own fingers and toes. Some people had all the fun.//

Paradise. When our teachers had had their fun making us draw in the blood with our toes, they used to send us down to the hardware store to get four candles.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 10:42:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//Well then, how about those Yankees Eh?
I thought they did pretty well, but I'm not so sure now. Ah well, maybe next game.//

I dunno much about baseball, but who's on first?
Posted by Toni Lavis, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 10:53:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's right. Who's on first, What's on second, and I Don't Know is on third.
Posted by ALTRAV, Wednesday, 25 April 2018 11:42:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Freedom of ideas and expression has allowed us to object even rebel against the establishment by our judgment and opinion of irrational and inhumane behaviour. As a child we lived in a mostly Catholic settled area with a Catholic Church and school attached. There was no public school so my first day at school I received the cane for cutting my hand on the cross cut saw while sawing wood for the fire as I began school in mid winter. I believed this was totally unjust by the Nun. I stayed at that school till the end of the year before being sent to live with grandparent to attend Public School; much more civilized.
Posted by Josephus, Thursday, 26 April 2018 8:50:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ,

Of course, IQ tests are not meaningless. Of course they accurately measure something, but not necessarily some genetically inherited intelligence, if that's what you're getting at.

Anyway, to get back to topic: Folau, no matter how intelligent he is (and i think he is), is entitled to his opinion like any of us. His opinion might 'offend' some people, homosexuals who believe in Hell in this case, but can any of us say that we've never expressed an opinion which may not have offended anybody ? What's the good of such mush ?

Surely, to have firm beliefs - and do any of us demand that people shouldn't have firm beliefs ? - means that you may offend at least somebody ? If my firm belief is that, for those on OLO who disagree with me, that they can kiss my hairy arse, I'm presuming that that deeply-informed opinion may offend some anonymous reader. But that's half the fun, even if somewhere there, I've committed either a logical fallacy or given impossible advice, except for those in SA.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Thursday, 26 April 2018 9:12:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe,

You appear to have missed my post at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=8228#256116.

Perhaps that was the moral of the story: that we tend to agree or disagree with people (or at least object to what they say) based on whether we see ourselves as being politically aligned with them, or at least being aligned with them on an issue that we view as more fundamental to the rest of our views?

OLO’s self-professed racist spouts the sort of nonsense I was spouting on an almost weekly basis when he’s posting regularly, and no one says boo. Yet when I do the same, suddenly it’s objectionable.

Or do we feel the need to object to racist talk on this particular occasion because Folau has said something that we like? After all, I can’t imagine too many people around here are up in arms about David Irving’s ban on entering the country, nor the prominent anti-vaxxers who want to tour. Where are our heroic right-wing defenders of free speech when holocaust deniers and anti-vaxxers need them?

Local anti-vaxxers find it almost impossible to secure a venue. Where's the outrage there? Are the owners of venues less obliged than Qantas to let those seeking some reciprocation to just say whatever they want? Does Folau's right to freedom of speech trump Qantas's right to express disapproval in the way they see fit? It's a little like Popper's paradox of tolerance, now that I think about it.

This debate is far more nuanced than anyone on OLO or in the media are treating it. Nothing is black-and-white. Not even a right a basic as freedom of speech.

Nope, I don't buy the ‘free speech’ angle at all. I think it's nothing more than disingenuous virtue signalling.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 26 April 2018 11:50:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ,

You lost me again: why is it at all necessary to refer to Folau's 'race' or ethnic background when he expresses an opinion ? Surely it's the opinion we should be paying attention to ? I don't give a toss if he's right- or left-handed, or whatever, it's his viewpoint that counts: in other words, where do each of us stand in relation to what he said ? Since I don't believe in a heaven or a hell, I'm assuming that the only people who might get upset would be homosexuals who do. Presumably they have their opinions about where I might end up, but I'll get over that, I've got plenty of tissues.

To have an opinion is to risk having one which is different from somebody else's. Ergo, offence may be caused to both parties. Opinion and offence therefore go together, one follows from the other, at least in non-totalitarian societies. But should someone's career be destroyed by powerful business interests just because they say something with which some powerful person can take offence ? In the land of the fair go ? Or is that threat a major step in the direction of totalitarianism ?

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Thursday, 26 April 2018 1:05:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Joe,

The longer you maintain the rage, the more you prove my point in my last post.

It's becoming increasingly obvious that when you say, "You lost me...", you had actually stopped reading my post at some crucial point. That can be a really foolish thing to do on OLO. Just ask ttbn.

Clearly, you've barely read a word of my last three posts. This is starting to look really funny. So, I'm going to leave this recipe for Anzac biscuits right here and see if you still give me the same silly response:

Preheat oven to 170°C. Place the flour, oats, sugar and coconut in a large bowl and stir to combine.

In a small saucepan place the golden syrup and butter and stir over low heat until the butter has fully melted. Mix the bicarb soda with 1 1/2 tablespoons water and add to the golden syrup mixture. It will bubble whilst you are stirring together so remove from the heat.

Pour into the dry ingredients and mix together until fully combined. Roll tablespoonfuls of mixture into balls and place on baking trays lined with non stick baking paper, pressing down on the tops to flatten slightly. Bake for 12 minutes or until golden brown.

I await your reply.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 26 April 2018 2:59:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ,

Rage ? No, not at all. Simply a sense of regret that some people are still pig-ignorant and misunderstand and distort issues.

And I made Anzac biscuits a couple of weeks back. I usually put more oats and coconut in than the recipe recommends.

Any chance of sticking to topic ?

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Thursday, 26 April 2018 3:40:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I hear ya there, Joe.

<<Rage ? No, not at all. Simply a sense of regret that some people are still pig-ignorant and misunderstand and distort issues.>>

But you need to express that regret to the relevant people. I haven’t seen you do that, and that was part of my point.

<<To have an opinion is to risk having one which is different from somebody else's.>>

Agreed. To think, you must be able to risk offending people. But if we say something offensive enough - especially when we have chosen to live a life in the public eye - then we need to accept that there may be social consequences to that.

There is no law against what Folau said, and he has not been dragged off before the courts for saying it. He’s had his freedom of speech, now everyone else is having theirs.

<<But should someone's career be destroyed by powerful business interests just because they say something with which some powerful person can take offence ?>>

Your language is a little on the emotive side there, I think. If Qantas’s backlash is JUST the result of a powerful person taking offence, then Folau's career is not being destroyed by “powerful business interests”, because one person’s offence is not a business interest.

Anyway, do you think that Alan Joyce was the only one in Qantas who took offence to the comments? You don’t think that the Board agreed that it might not be in best interests of the company to continue their sponsorship, given how the general public feel about homophobia?

Personally, I think it’s overkill to pull sponsorship just because of one offensive comment from one imbecile. My biggest concern is the hyperbole and hypocrisy of the cries that freedom of speech is under attack. If Folau were to have denied the Holocaust, no one would care if Rugby Australia fired him and sponsors threatened to sever ties. The talk of free speech is just homophobia in disguise.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 26 April 2018 5:05:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//And I made Anzac biscuits a couple of weeks back. I usually put more oats and coconut in than the recipe recommends.//

Coconut? In Anzac biscuits? Dear oh dear. Truly the end times are upon us.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Thursday, 26 April 2018 7:19:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ANZAC Biscuits:

Ingredients

1 cup rolled oats.
1 cup plain flour.
2/3 cup brown sugar.
2/3 cup desiccated coconut.
125g butter, chopped.
2 tablespoons golden syrup.
1/2 teaspoon bicarbonate of soda.
Posted by Is Mise, Thursday, 26 April 2018 8:56:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for that, Is Mise.

I decided against including the list of ingredients because they would have stuck out like dogs' balls. But since the recipe for Anzac biscuits already features on this thread, I guess we may as well have the list of ingredients too.

I'll be bookmarking this thread for next year's bake off.
Posted by AJ Philips, Thursday, 26 April 2018 9:36:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Seriously? You're all putting coconut in!?

I'm so triggered right now.

>:-(
Posted by Toni Lavis, Thursday, 26 April 2018 9:43:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks Issy that is the standard recipe for ANZAC biscuits.

Just directing the topic back where it belongs, so some jackass said.

On the point of Coconuts and IQ. Most here would be familiar with the ground breaking research conducted by Professor Siegfried Von Ocenburger and published in the prestigious scientific journal the 1927 edition of 'The Boys Own Almanac'. The good professor conducted IQ test on a variety of fruits and vegetables, including coconuts. I would provide a link, but unfortunately my link button is broken at this moment, although you could try www... and.whattheforkisthisfoolonabout.com.....au, why you would, I do not know.

Professor Von Ocenburger concluded that the IQ of the average Coconut is 27, on a par with the average radish, and we all know how dumb the average radish is. I ask where does that leave coconuts? The answer is obvious, to be painlessly (no brain, no pain) desiccated and put into Issy's ANZAC biscuits, and shot at Turkeys. read the next paragraph.

p/s Professor Von Ocenburger, is now domiciled in the Bahamas, (who would go to Turkey), thanks to generous benefactors such as myself, you too can donate in the name of science at the above website. The Professor is presently into his fifth year of research in the Bahamas, into the ability of farm yard animals, including Turkeys, to operate heavy artillery and fire it at the smart people who like eating ANZAC Biscuits. So far his findings have been inconclusive, but research goes on. Evacuation may be necessary.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 27 April 2018 6:14:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
//Thanks Issy that is the standard recipe for ANZAC biscuits.//

No, it's a bastardisation. The traditional Anzac biscuit contains no coconut. They were originally developed from a Scottish recipe, hence the oats. And lack of coconut.

Like the Waratahs Rugby Union team, a proper Anzac biscuit should contain no coconut. It has no place in the recipe, and you're all going to hell for putting it in. But don't worry, it's easy to be born again and get back on the right track: just ditch the coconut and substitute in extra oats.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Friday, 27 April 2018 8:11:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That’s multiculturalism for you, Toni Lavis. It’s starts with coconut in Anzac biscuits. The next thing you know, we’ll all be wearing banana leaves, desecrating our flesh with ungodly markings, and climbing trees - like Folau and his primitive kind - because we can’t get enough coconut for our Anzac biscuits.

They want to destroy the Australian way of life, and what better way to do that than to strike at the heart of one of our greatest traditions!
Posted by AJ Philips, Friday, 27 April 2018 9:34:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Now fellas, you are just not being inclusive enough here. I think to be truly inclusive you should add 2 tablespoons of coco to the recipe to demonstrate to our not so white brothers, homophobic rugby players included, that we recognize their contribution at Gallipoli, even if they were not there, but would have been there if we had allowed them to be there. Also a splash of Raki in the mix would be appropriate in this day and age, to demonstrate to our Turkish brethren that we hold no animosity, despite the fact they tried to blow our grandfathers to smithereens! The world is one big happy family now.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 27 April 2018 11:09:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Paul,

Are you not aware that there were Pacific Islanders at Gallipoli and other battles in WWI?

http://nzhistory.govt.nz/war/pacific-islanders-nzef
Posted by Is Mise, Friday, 27 April 2018 10:01:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Issy, I have seen the Maori war memorial and museum in New Zealand. Over 2,000 served in the Maori Contingents in WWI. There was a fear among some Europeans that "native people" fighting on the British and French sides might come to expect equal treatment with white soldiers.Their involvement in WWII was even more significant than it had been in WWI.
Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 27 April 2018 10:31:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 22
  7. 23
  8. 24
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy