Foxy said; And all this supposedly in the name of "religious freedom.?"

Wrong, this is a public pushback by the deplorables and the politically
incorrect, and the silent Australians against all the lefty raving
against everything, especially freedom of speech.

The average of the donations is $100.
Doesn't that alone tell you where it is coming from ?

Remember the young lady in Canberra, I think it was, who lost her job
because she supported the wrong party.
Thats what it is all about.

runner,

This might help you understand a few things:

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/biblical_evidence/no_fems_no_fairies.html

Bazz,

Would someone be sacked if they called Christians stupid
or deluded? They've just expressed something they believed
in that they regard as a blatant fact.
Maybe they would? But hey it's freedom of speech isn't it?
Works both ways?

Freedom of speech of expression does not mean freedom
from consequences.

tbbn "How many Muslims read the Christian Bible?"

The old Testament is also part of Judaeism and Islam and is the basis of all three Abrahamic faiths. That's the law they are complying with.

Old Testament plus New Testament = Christianity.
Old Testament plus Torah = Judaeism
Old Testament plus Koran = Islam.

The Old Testament also specifies that adulters and people who work on the sabbath should be stoned to death and disobedient children should be "dashed onto the rocks", just to name a few charming examples.
Who was burning witches for centuries (as instructed) and keeping slaves and didn't suddenly stop those practices because of the Bible but in spite of it?

The usual Christian punishment for adulterous women in Alexandria was to stake them out on the ground and have their entrails eaten by pigs but we never mention that inconvenient fact, nor that Hypatia was killed by a Christian mob by having the living flesh carved off her bones with broken tiles and shells. No we've always been much too civilised for that.

Early Christians didn't walk around in a mellowed-out daze like in the movies but were violent fanatical zealots and it was Constantine who tried to restore order in the Empire and unite it by trying to get them to stop fighting among themselves, persecuting Jews and agree on a single story - a "New Testimony". His successor re-banned Christianity because of their increased violence but was assassinated two years later - allegedly by a Christian soldier - a nice beginning we never talk about. The resulting mass slaughter of pagans and the tearing down of their Temples - likewise.

Like all those who get their sanitised history from Hollywood and cuddly Sunday School stories the whole history of religion is conveniently ignored.

But I get what most people here are trying to say - Islam is evil and homosexuality is "yucky". It's just that they want to say it indirectly and hide behind external justification any way they can to shift the blame for personal prejudice elsewhere.

Dear runner,

You write; “someone who divorces un scripturally and then remarries commits adultery”

Okay mate, now you have my interest, what on earth is scriptural divorce? I am really keen to see what torture you are going to put God's word through to justify this one.

Dear Bazz,

You write;

“Wrong, this is a public pushback by the deplorables and the politically
incorrect, and the silent Australians against all the lefty raving
against everything, especially freedom of speech.”

No it isn't, this is the right hijacking, as you are doing, an issue for their own ends.

I think sacking Falou and banning him for life is unfair just as I think Falou going out of his way to single out homosexuals in unfair. The verse he quoted to justify his 'meme' didn't include the word at all. All the other things he mentioned were behavioural but unless you believe that attraction to the same sex is not genetic then he is attacking people for the way they were born. This is patently unfair.

I fully support him getting called out on it and sanctioned appropriately, just not this way.

I have express deep concerns about the control corporations have over our sport. They have every right to withdraw sponsorship if they feel their brand will suffer by association but when it comes to selection in the Australian side this should be done without consideration of sponsors.

In my opinion this is all about dollars not an issue of religious freedom at all and this is where the solution should have been found. Falou should have been fined up to 100% of his match payments for continuing to flout rules set by the code's administrator. If his actions ended up costing sponsorship dollars thus impacting the rest of the team then Falou should have to compensate them.

Money, money, money. Only more highlighted by the malcontents here giving a running score check on how much one of the highest paid sports people in the country has managed to extract from the pockets of ordinary Australians.

"scriptural divorce,"glad you asked, well that's when a man, its a man thing, walks around the little woman three times in an anti-clockwise direction, all the whilst reciting "I divorce thee, I divorce thee, I divorce thee". Some then hit the little woman over the head with a 10 pound hammer, but that's an optional extra, and not absolutely necessary in these enlightened times, a five pound hammer will have the same effect. All done in the name of the Holy Ghost of course, don't forget the holy Ghost, otherwise its not legal.