SR understand but firmly think the court would fix that, if not?
Once again saw GYs post agree with that and take the same stand.
Have no doubt even some posting here will want the bill to be one-sided or unbalanced but if it is it will bring the roof down.
They exist, that is those who think only about their faith but the bill must, to work, cover all and every faith.
Some most of us clearly do not like

- It's all a bit of a minefield.
I told you all ages ago that there wouldn't be any winners out of this Israel Folau thing.

If he has the right to say what he said then other religions will be allowed to say a whole lot of other things.
If he doesn't have a right to say what he said then employers have the right to dictate what people can and can't post online.
- There's no winner here -

Israel Folau won because it was never stipulated in his contract that he refrain from the making the comments he did.
- He never signed the separate extra section they tried to force him to sign after he'd already signed the original contract.

AC, just tagging on the back of your comment about Folau, did I hear someone say that Folau's case firmly goes back to the old chestnut that women should NOT be in top management positions.
This being said, it is just another nail in their coffin.
As for the ABC, I have no idea what the hell is going on there, by hiring I've a but-nose.
You know it must be wonderful to have friends in high places.
As it turns out the higher the office, the less you actually do.
I have had to endure some of the most horrendous people and their commentary form the ABC, with every mothers son of them giving personal opinions.
And then some come out with instructions on telling us how to behave in general.
Who do these morons think they are?
They have to be reminded that they are mere presenters, and as such are nothing, nobody, value-less.
The ABC should rein these presenters in and give THEM a lecture on what their job is and not what THEY think it is.
This is another conflict of free speech and discrimination.
They are discriminating against the audience by making unsolicited and certainly in most cases, unwarranted suggestions or remarks.
It's unfortunate that people are such lemons, because if they were a little more cynical and aware they would not believe everything they hear, see or read.

AC agree the Israel thing was a draw he got some cash [rumor two-point two million] the head of that game, will in time find herself out of work

The Falau case was settled out of court so it has not confiremed the
law either. It is assumed he won as him and his wife had very big
smiles when they came out.
This whole free speech business is fraught with unintended results.
Just read up on the UK's experience with it.
The UK is no longer a country governed by law and sharia law has an
increasing influence on judicial judgements.

1/.You should have the right to say what you like to whomever you like. If they say something stupid then you have the right to tell them so.

2/. The theists object to this because every time they open their mouths they put there foot into it and cannot help but say something foolish and they are trying to gag our right of telling them they are stupid.

3/. Do we want to become as bad as many countries where criticism is met with gaol or execution?