Bazz,

You don't have to apologise to me for your opinion.
You're entitled to it. As I am to disagree with it.
I am merely concerned. You need to be careful
in what you post, the way you post it, and who your
sources are. You don't want people to get the wrong
impression.

This is
a really important issue today. And there's a whole
bunch of skewed hatred and people are being targeted,
sometimes very personall, on social media.

Intolerant messages and bashings of certain targeted
groups is not very wise in this day and age.
There's too much hatred around as it is.

Foxy highlights my complaint about SOME here
We need contributors and we need to not become a verbal graffiti board that constantly insults each other
Being On one side or the other in this debate does not make anyone a lefty or right wing nut
The community is divided by this issue
I have changed my view after Christians made it about his faith and cash
He will not win, after all the human rights stuff is sifted he broke a contract

Thanks Foxy, well I see that a lawyer has given an opinion that QANTAS
could be found guilty of a third party boycott offense if the court
decides to hear evidence about their interference.

As far as being careful what I say, well that is what it is all about !
I understand that some new legislation came into force yesterday.
There is some "hate speech" legislation coming and I am not sure if it
is what came in yesterday.
So if so I guess I will have to be careful not to say something that a
muslim or a snowflake lefty finds offensive.
Oh dear, would a muslim find that offensive ?

This is where they have got to in the UK. Free speech in the UK is
very much limited these days.
Just googled new legislation and it appears nothing like I thought
came into effect yesterday. However lots of other new laws.

New laws are so prolific hardly anyone knows what is current.

Cheers

Foxy,

I find some of your assumptions problematic:

1 Folau's comment can hurt or harm people. This is pure bollocks, it can offend people which is clearly not the same, and the principle of free speech is that because people are offended does not make the speech either hateful or harmful.

2 If the speech is fundamental to Folau's religious beliefs and not used specifically to vilify anyone, then sacking him for stating his religious beliefs is illegal, and the procedures followed are irrelevant.

3 As his comments on social media were not addressed in the contract, the reliance on a code of conduct is weak reason to dismiss as James Cook university found out.

SM,

Folau's case is not about freedom of speech.
He broke the professional code of conduct in
his contract. He broke his
contractual obligation despite many warnings
and a letter in writing. He understood what
was expected of him, and chose to ignore it.

The law is clear in this matter and he's only
one of many thousands currently suing for
"unfair dismissal." The courts will decide.

If you don't believe me - speak to a lawyer
familiar with industrial dispute cases.

As for the Peter Ridd case?

That's a different more complex matter.
Which I've covered in another discussion on this forum
started by ttbn -
dealing with James Cook University. You're welcome
to go and read my comments there.

Dear GrahamY,

Picking on the poor Wikipedia writers for making perfectly valid points when exulted pivotal figures of the Christian faith have written the following is really a bit rich;

St.  Augustine: “Judaism is a corruption.  Indeed Judas is the image of the Jewish people.  Their understanding of the Scriptures is carnal.  They bear the guilt for the death of the saviour, for through their fathers they have killed the Christ.”

St.  Thomas Aquinas: “It would be licit to hold Jews, because of the crimes, in perpetual servitude, and therefore the princes may regard the possessions of Jews as belonging to the State.”

Martin Luther: “Know, 0 adored Christ, and make no mistake, that aside from the Devil, you have no enemy more venomous, more desperate, more bitter, than a true Jew who truly seeks to be a Jew... a Jew, a Jewish heart, are hard as wood, as stone, as iron, as the Devil himself.  In short, they are children of the Devil, condemned to the flames of hell.”

They were considered intellectual giants of the faith yet it would be impossible to imagine they were 'in fear of being killed by local Jews'. These 'fathers' were mostly inspired John's scriptures which the Wikipedia article quite rightly flagged.

The question still stands; “What if instead of quoting passages about homosexuals headed for hell he had quoted John and claimed that Jews are to be feared and that 'Salvation is from the Jews'?”

The verses Falou used to justify his meme was Galatians 5 19-21 (see link).

“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-11/israel-folau-slammed-over-latest-anti-gay-comments/10991574

Not a single mention of homosexuals. He went out of his way to introduce them into into his graphic. Far closer to hate speech than just quoting scripture.