http://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/devil-in-the-detail-of-lightning-rod-israel-folau-mural-20190705-p524kb.html
Other opinions exist
IF it can be proved [recent events make that doubtful] his right to his faith is the driver I will return to backing him
But as more information comes out, about his wealth, his dads roll ,his being warned not to do it again?
I truly doubt any current group with any real power is trying to stop Christians having their faith
Can we say that about Islam?
The Jewish faith

Amazing: more than fifty years ago, the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Movement

was avowedly left-wing, very exciting, in the flow of the civil rights movement.

And now, the 'Left' - at least here - are avowedly anti-Free Speech. Totalitarian wolves in sheep's clothing ? Still secretly working towards Soviet-style 'revolution' ? The Party's over, kiddies.

Amazing.

Joe

The Left here are avowedly against free speech?

Really?

Silly me. Here I thought people were against
vilification and discrimination and a set of
rules for some and a different set of rules
for the rest of society. That's not freedom.
That's privilege.

The free speech movement at the University of
California in Berkeley was a totally different
kettle of fish. It began with students protesting
a ban on the campus political activities starting
with the struggle for civil rights and later was
fueled by the opposition to the Vietnam war.

Free speech is not absolute, and like any human
right, free speech carries with it responsibilities
and consequences.

A recent story has revealed that social media posts
and emails are at the centre of the majority of
defamation actions in court often representing
themselves in complex and expensive area of law.

This is a really important issue on social media
because its where cyber trolls, stalkers, bullies, and
revenge posters are, and there's a whole bunch of
hatred, and people are targeted, sometimes very
personally.

I wonder, can we confront the truth?
Yes the bloke both appeared in a game calling for gay rights and then got himself involved in this
He could have used the pulpit, surely no one dare challenge him if he did it there
Remember that thing, the one who called our women raw meat?
Did he and his protector, a fellow poster here once at least, have the right to say that
SOME things are offensive, needlessly so

Everyone, quick, shut up, the speech Nazi is out in force again, quoting the obvious, 'still'.
Would someone please remind her 'again' that FREEDOM of SPEECH, is self explanatory.
It does not come with side bar explanations like 'all speech comes with consequences', DUH!
Why does someone say such stupid things?
I think it is safe to say that every comment is at risk of being challenged and therefore has consequences.
It is arrogant, presumptuous and pompous of someone to carry on as if an authority on 'everything'.
I am forced once again to counter such an overbearing and pompous attitude.
I'm not sure how many ways one can interpret the words, FREEDOM of SPEECH, other than the only meaning it has, and the operative word is FREEDOM!
Any attempt at trying to add anything to those words is pointless and irrelevant.

Foxy,

" .... people are targeted, sometimes very personally."

You mean, like Folau ?

As for 'vilification', while I'm hurt by his reference to drunkards, I would defend his right to criticise them. Criticism is not hate speech. Criticism is not vilification. Criticism is not 'discrimination'. It's free speech. As long as it doesn't incite violence or humiliate, it's okay with me. Even his dreadful attacks on drunkards, which, as a Cristian, he qualifies by offering me the option of repenting: condemn the sin, not the sinner, Foxy.

Joe