Page 35 of 38 FirstFirst ... 25 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 LastLast
Results 511 to 525 of 569

Thread: "Warning homosexuals, hell awaits you, repent" - Israel Folau

  1. #511
    Veteran Sheikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,338
    vCash
    10000
    Dry July! 141 Club Award
    Cameron Clyne has potentially screwed Rugby Australia with his comments? Who'd of thought it?

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

  2. #512
    Immortal Contributor The InnFORCEr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    West Leederville
    Posts
    15,901
    vCash
    3242000
    Dry July! Tong Master 141 Club Award TWF Contributor! TWF Competition Winner!

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?

    Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!

    Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!

  3. #513
    Veteran Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,875
    vCash
    5114000
    TWF Contributor! 141 Club Award
    Extending Clyne's logic, I have never heard him come forward and say that he is happy with having his nuts unkicked. It would be nice to think he has someone as concerned for him as he is for the sponsors, can help him out with that...

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by AndyS; 01-07-19 at 12:21.

  4. #514
    Legend Contributor Alison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    7,053
    vCash
    5216000
    TWF Contributor!
    Please Cameron, if you genuinely care for the game of rugby union, tender your resignation from the RA board as soon as possible. You have dragged the game down far enough. Please donít let it hit absolutely rock bottom. You and your board have the honour and privilege of being the guardians of the code in Australia. You have done nothing to respect that honour and privilege so move over and let someone else fix your mess.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by Alison; 01-07-19 at 12:39.

  5. #515
    Immortal Book Maker
    Contributor
    Moderator
    travelling_gerry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia, Australia
    Posts
    18,326
    vCash
    5274000
    Tong Master Dry July! 141 Club Award TWF Competition Runner Up! MO-vember Donator TWF Contributor!
    And unlike fighting on religious freedoms Sect 45D has well and truly been tested in courts.

    The Meat Union was effectively bankrupted in the 80s for this.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  6. #516
    Veteran Bakkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    3,651
    vCash
    5088000
    Quote Originally Posted by sittingbison View Post
    Clyne is already going to hell
    Fixed.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    'I may be a Senator but I am not stupid'


    https://omny.fm/shows/the-alan-jones-breakfast-show/cameron-clyne

    Link to Senate Report http://www.aph.gov.au/senate_ca

    https://www.change.org/p/rugby-australia-petition-for-cameron-clyne-to-resign-as-chairman-of-the-rugby-australia-board

  7. #517
    Veteran Bakkies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    3,651
    vCash
    5088000
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheikh View Post
    Cameron Clyne has potentially screwed Rugby Australia with his comments? Who'd of thought it?
    What a magnificent job his PR adviser from the NAB has done.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    'I may be a Senator but I am not stupid'


    https://omny.fm/shows/the-alan-jones-breakfast-show/cameron-clyne

    Link to Senate Report http://www.aph.gov.au/senate_ca

    https://www.change.org/p/rugby-australia-petition-for-cameron-clyne-to-resign-as-chairman-of-the-rugby-australia-board

  8. #518
    Legend Court Reporter
    Contributor
    James's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Bridgetown, WA
    Posts
    5,861
    vCash
    5132000
    TWF Contributor! TWF Competition Runner Up!
    That column is a load of bollocks. Took one quote and turned it into non article. Clyne is a dick, but they are completely misrepresenting what was said.

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast.

  9. #519
    Champion SPaRTAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,871
    vCash
    1102000
    Quote Originally Posted by James View Post
    That column is a load of bollocks. Took one quote and turned it into non article. Clyne is a dick, but they are completely misrepresenting what was said.
    Yeah unfortunately that seems to be the case when you really read into it. Clynes a dick and I hope he falls on his sword, but his comments will have no impact on Folau's procedings. The article is just click bait.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  10. #520
    Veteran sittingbison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Freo
    Posts
    2,792
    vCash
    5016000
    Misrepresented? The problem is that in a wrongful dismissal case involving $10 million, with many contrary avenues to be argued is workplace contract vs religious freedom of expression vs freedom of speech vs discrimination and vilification, the chairman of the board who has not supported his CEO with a single word has come out with a steaming pile of nonsensical drivel that an English professor at Oxford University would struggle to interpret. Double and triple non sequiturs.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    The long sobs of autumn's violins wound my heart with a monotonous languor

  11. #521
    Immortal Contributor The InnFORCEr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    West Leederville
    Posts
    15,901
    vCash
    3242000
    Dry July! Tong Master 141 Club Award TWF Contributor! TWF Competition Winner!
    Not my work, straight from the book of faces


    Dear Mr & Mrs Folau,

    Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can.

    When someone tries to defend the homosexual/transsexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of debate.

    I do, however, need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.
    These are:

    1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations.
    A friend of mine claims that this applies to Papua New Guineans, but not New Zealanders. Can you clarify? Why can't I own New Zealanders?

    2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

    3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24.
    The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

    4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9.
    The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

    5. I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death.
    Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

    6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

    7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

    8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

    9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes you unclean, but may Americans still play football if they wear gloves?

    10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

    I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can help.
    Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

    PS: It would be a real shame if we couldn't own a New Zealander

    7 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?

    Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!

    Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!

  12. #522
    Immortal Contributor shasta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Mandurah
    Posts
    13,291
    vCash
    5308000
    The Bronze Star of Faith TWF Contributor!
    Quote Originally Posted by The InnFORCEr View Post
    4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9.
    The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

    This is not possible in modern society because Coach has removed the smiting facility. The most you can do is give them a "thumbs down", a or chuck him/her a over the side fence.

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    "The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David

  13. #523
    Immortal Contributor The InnFORCEr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    West Leederville
    Posts
    15,901
    vCash
    3242000
    Dry July! Tong Master 141 Club Award TWF Contributor! TWF Competition Winner!
    The current state of play in the Israel Folau case
    Last Updated: 30 June 2019
    Article by Michael Byrnes


    What proceedings has Israel Folau initiated?

    It has been widely reported that Israel Folau has commenced proceedings with the Fair Work Commission (FWC) alleging a breach of section 772 of the Fair Work Act (Act) for unlawful termination of his employment with Rugby Australia (RA) on the grounds of religion.

    Unlike court pleadings, and consistent with the FWC approach in such matters, the application is not available to the media or public.
    Some reports have also referred to the proceedings including a claim for breach of contract.

    While a claim for breach of contract will almost certainly be a feature of the case if it proceeds beyond the FWC, the source of the jurisdiction of the FWC is the Act and it is unable to entertain such claims (although an examination of contractual terms may be relevant in any consideration of a breach of the Act).

    How will the FWC deal with the proceedings?

    The role of the FWC is confined to conciliating (mediating) the matter. It will not conduct a hearing or make any substantive orders in the current proceedings.

    The conciliation process before the FWC is a mandated step before commencing proceedings in the Federal Court in which unlawful termination is pleaded.

    It might come as a surprise to those unfamiliar with the process that the usual practice of the FWC for matters involving termination is for there to be, at least initially, a telephone conciliation using one of the FWC staff conciliators. This approach is ordinarily adopted even when the case involves high profile individuals or has garnered significant media attention. (Presumably consistent with the view that the processes of justice should be blind to such considerations.)

    That said, if the matter does not settle at the telephone conciliation there may be an opportunity for a face-to-face conciliation before a member of the FWC.

    What are the steps after the FWC?

    If the matter does not resolve before the FWC then it will issue a certificate to that effect and the matter can then proceed, at the election of Folau, to the next stage, which Folau has foreshadowed will be the Federal Court.

    After a determination by the Federal Court there is then the possibility of appeal to the Full Court of the Federal Court (comprising three judges) and then the High Court of Australia.

    Before the High Court considers the merits of the matter in a substantive manner the party appealing the decision below needs to be granted special leave by the court.

    The fact the case is a talking point among many Australians and is the subject of saturation coverage in the media does not, of itself, mean the High Court will grant such leave. The fact it is of interest to the public does not make it a matter of ?"public importance" for the purpose of the special leave application.

    Will the case cost $3 million?

    The (now defunct) GoFundMe and subsequent Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) crowdfunding pages set a goal for legal costs for the case of $3 million.

    There is, as far as I can determine, no specifics provided of how this estimate of costs was arrived at nor any reference to any estimate provided by any lawyers acting for Folau to him or for the purpose of the crowdfunding exercise.

    To give some perspective, on the ACL crowdfunding page, reference is made to Folau's actual legal costs for the relatively extensive RA internal process (which included a multi-day hearing before a RA panel consisting of two senior counsel with extensive experience in employment law and a sports administrator) as being $100,000.

    Estimating legal costs is, given the vagaries of litigation, an inexact science even when a lawyer has extensive information and instructions about a case, let alone when trying to estimate likely costs from the relatively limited matters in the public domain. With that qualification in mind it is, however, difficult to conceive of how a case of this type could, even going all the way to the High Court, ultimately cost as much as $3 million or close to it. Various lawyers have publicly come forward to opine that the likely cost of the case is substantially lower than that amount. I agree with that assessment.

    Is the Folau case a good "test case"?

    At the time of writing, the crowdfunding efforts on behalf of Folau have raised in excess of $1.8 million. Setting aside the merits of the matter, there is no doubt the case has struck a chord with many in the Australian community.

    A recurring theme of talkback radio calls and social media posts, from those who say they have donated, is that they are motivated by a concern that employers are overreaching when it comes to personal beliefs of employees and the expression of those beliefs, with Folau's situation constituting the start of a slippery slope and his case being an ideal way to put this issue before the courts for a definitive determination to protect the interests of all employees.

    Concerns about employers unjustifiably encroaching on the private lives of employees has united people across the political and philosophical divide. Various legal commentators (including myself) have written about the risks of overreach from employers who might include contractual terms or promulgate and implement codes of conduct that purport to regulate out of hours employee conduct (including social media posts and other forms of expression) that has no or minimal nexus with the legitimate interests of the employer. The employer's prerogative to govern out of hours employee conduct has limits (as notably set out in the decision of Rose v Telstra Corporation Limited (1998) AIRC 1592).

    The Folau case, however, is likely not going to be an ideal test case to determine the limits of the prerogative of employers to regulate the out of hours conduct of employees. Test cases are ideally the best example of a group to whom the ultimate finding will pertain, in this context being employees. Israel Folau was an atypical employee. As a public figure, it will be difficult for Folau to argue that his post was done in a "private" capacity, or that the post could have nothing to do with RA because it is something he did "off-duty". The nature of the duties associated with his role, which did not begin and end on the rugby field, means his case is different to the "average" or "normal" employee who would be in a stronger position to argue that their personal conduct has no reasonably arguable connection with their employment.

    A better test case to establish the parameters of an employer's prerogative to regulate an employee's private conduct is an employee who is never called upon to publicly represent their employer, can establish a clear demarcation between their private social media account and employment and has no broader obligation to maintain the reputation of their employer. A case involving such an employee who has their employment terminated for expressing views or beliefs would likely be more instructive in establishing the true limits of the relevant employer prerogative.

    Ultimately, the case will likely turn on the very specific terms of Folau's contract and the RA Code of Conduct rather than any broader principle of religious freedom or freedom of speech.

    While the Folau case is presently a matter of great interest to the media and many in the general public, it is likely to disappoint as a case of enduring legal significance which sets a precedent for all employees.

    A worthwhile debate

    The Folau case has been the catalyst for a very interesting and important public debate about the appropriate limits of an employer's prerogative to regulate the private lives of employees. The appropriate balance between the rights of employers and freedoms of employees will likely be a feature of robust discussion and employment law cases for some time to come.

    For further information please contact:

    Michael Byrnes, Partner
    Phone: +61 2 9233 5544
    Email: mjb@swaab.com.au

    The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

    http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?ar...mail_access=on

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    80 Minutes, 15 Positions, No Protection, Wanna Ruck?

    Ruck Me, Maul Me, Make Me Scrum!

    Education is Important, but Rugby is Importanter!

  14. #524
    Veteran Sheikh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4,338
    vCash
    10000
    Dry July! 141 Club Award
    Quote Originally Posted by The InnFORCEr View Post
    4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9.
    The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
    I didn't realise Leviticus had laws allowing the smiting of vegans!

    2 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Don't tell me the sky's the limit when there are footprints on the moon

  15. #525
    Immortal jargan83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Earth Capital
    Posts
    20,072
    vCash
    5228000
    141 Club Award The Bronze Star of Faith
    Quote Originally Posted by Sheikh View Post
    I didn't realise Leviticus had laws allowing the smiting of vegans!
    Best reason I've heard recently to take up religion!

    1 Not allowed! Not allowed!

Page 35 of 38 FirstFirst ... 25 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 27-11-17, 06:38
  2. Nick "Off the bone" Cummins - Italy post match interview!
    By The InnFORCEr in forum Nick Cummins
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-11-13, 18:32
  3. The Israel Folau interview ...soon
    By The Man in forum NSW Waratahs
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 20-02-13, 10:11
  4. What the hell is a "Google Search Cloud" ?
    By Darren in forum Site News, Suggestions and Troubles
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-08-08, 20:04
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-06-06, 22:19

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •