Israel Folau - Breach of contract or right to free speech?

[IFocus]

Alternatively, unions have fought to keep protections and rights of workers enshrined in law. I know this case is unpleasant. But it can have wide ranging consequences either way it falls.

Apparently from days past- Folau is on the cover of a gay magazine in support of homosexuals.

Everyone has an opinion on the issue and no end of angles as Folau has played the religious card while being an extremely wealthy individual then just more fuel to the fire once he started fund raising.

A court is where it belongs to resolve the RA dispute and I think Reds assessment is pretty well spot on.

The whole conflict is really about thinking from 2000 years ago meets the modern age.

 

[IFocus]

Rob, whats your opinion of his previous work (gay magazine cover and work) helping, or hindering his claim?

Was that cover a dig at Folau or did he get paid?

 

[moXJO]

Was that cover a dig at Folau or did he get paid?

Legitimate. He did work with the anti discrimination campaign, unbelievably. I thought it might be a gee up. But it seems legit.

 

[moXJO]

The whole conflict is really about thinking from 2000 years ago meets the modern age.

I think he has a pretty good chance.

Every religion thinks the other worshipers from other religions are going to hell. I think RA overplayed its hand.They have now put every religion offside and they know it. Notice their radio silence through the whole thing?

Netball Australia and NZ did a much better job. The mob went after his wife and they (at this stage) shut the wingers down.

 

[sptrawler]

The whole conflict is really about thinking from 2000 years ago meets the modern age.

What's that David and Goliath?

 

[sptrawler]

Everyone has an opinion on the issue and no end of angles as Folau has played the religious card while being an extremely wealthy individual then just more fuel to the fire once he started fund raising.
.

I don't think he will have anywhere near as much funds available as R.A, then what happens they just bleed him dry through the courts and it becomes who has the deepest pockets.
As usual, it would just be a case of not letting truth get in the way, of idealism and the "mob".
I hope it does go to court, why someone should be able to be sacked, because they have differing moral beliefs to management is beyond the pale. I know Muja Power Station would have been out the gate, if someone had been sacked because the management didn't like their personal beliefs.
Actually if management said your religious beliefs and or sexual preferences were a condition of employment, they would be in court for discrimination.
It will be very interesting and I don't think, they will want it all tested, just my opinion.
They should have fined him and or publicly reprimanded him, to sack him was crazy. But who knows, maybe they wanted him out anyway and this seemed like an opportunity?
By the way I've never seen him play, or watched rugby, so don't have a clue how he fits in.

 

[wayneL]

Cracked the $1,000,000

 

[moXJO]

Cracked the $1,000,000

That was fast.

 

[sptrawler]

It is all starting to implode on the bullies. IMO

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/netbal...nce-with-folau-statement-20190625-p52112.html

 

[moXJO]

It is all starting to implode on the bullies. IMO

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/netbal...nce-with-folau-statement-20190625-p52112.html

She folded in faster time than it took Folau's donations to hit $1mill.

 

[sptrawler]

She folded in faster time than it took Folau's donations to hit $1mill.

Possibly nervous, as to being next cab off the rank.

 

[sptrawler]

I guess this guy, with a tea towel on his head must be wondering, if he lives in a parallel universe. Which by what he wrote, he may well do.lol I wonder if he gets paid to write articles?
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...mob-and-kills-folau-page-20190624-p520ps.html

From the article:
Firstly, it may mean that Folau might have to – hold the presses – dip into his own pockets to fund his legal appeal, instead of building it on $5 and $10 donations from a lot of well-meaning people who actually seem to think this is about religious freedom in Australia, as if that was ever under threat.

It might even mean that the likes of Alan Jones who has been indicating for weeks that he will back Folau financially himself in any such legal appeal will have to follow through.

What it mostly means though is that, whatever the law will ultimately say on the Folau case, the Australian mobstands firmly against both the whole absurdity of the "gays are going to burn in hell" thing, and the very idea of using a crowd like GoFundMe to make it legally safe to shove that view in the face of your employers, even when you have firmly promised not to.

It will be interesting to see if 'Go Fund Me' sees a falling off in donations?
I hope not but IMO it was a silly stand for them to take, maybe they watch morning T.V and adjust there settings, very interesting precedent going to be made. IMO

 

[sptrawler]

Cracked $1,369,000, I suppose there is more people interested, than the other'mob' thought.

 

[sptrawler]

$1,497,000 still going strong, the media called this with the same accuracy as the election, Oh how the ravenous crowd roars.

 

[Smurf1976]

Noting that Joe has taken action to address the issue I've referred to about what's good and not good for ASF by making threads such as this visible only to those who opt in, I'll make another comment and that's to simply pass on something which came up in an offline discussion about this.

"Perhaps the best answer to the question is to ask another question. Hypothetically, if Folau had injured himself whilst producing his online content, which may happen due to for example a clearly not at fault incident such as the chair collapsing or computer catching fire, then would he have been eligible to receive Workers Compensation? If the answer is no, then it would seem that he was not at work when the incident occurred and that this is not a workplace issue but is a private matter."

Or words very similar to that.

Seems reasonable to me.

 

[rederob]

Hypothetically, if Folau had injured himself whilst producing his online content, which may happen due to for example a clearly not at fault incident such as the chair collapsing or computer catching fire, then would he have been eligible to receive Workers Compensation?

That's not a good example for a lot of reasons.
But mostly because it completely lacks relevance.

 

[Macquack]

$1,497,000 still going strong, the media called this with the same accuracy as the election, Oh how the ravenous crowd roars.

The CEO of the Australian Christian Lobby said this morning that there were approximately 15,000 donors at a average donation of roughly $100. 15,000 cashed up christians supporting Folau is hardly the opening of the floodgates of support.

 

[rederob]

Rob, whats your opinion of his previous work (gay magazine cover and work) helping, or hindering his claim?

I do not consider it relevant.
But here's the thing:
Imagine this idea of Folau's were found to be lawful.
You go to work and the walls are plastered with religious commentary of the worst kind, from any and every religion. The new "freedoms" allow this to be so. Workers are offended but employers can do nothing.
That's not a world I find acceptable.

 

[SirRumpole]

I do not consider it relevant.
But here's the thing:
Imagine this idea of Folau's were found to be lawful.
You go to work and the walls are plastered with religious commentary of the worst kind, from any and every religion. The new "freedoms" allow this to be so. Workers are offended but employers can do nothing.
That's not a world I find acceptable.

A bit extreme isn't it ?

Religion is declining in this country and if the majority of employees found religious "commentary" unacceptable they would take it down themselves, the employer would not have to do anything.

 

[rederob]

A bit extreme isn't it ?

You have never yet shown a grasp of what is at play here.
What I posted would be quite acceptable as it would be based on a person's religious beliefs no matter how vile.
That appears to be what you think "snowflakes" might be concerned about. Yet when I put the shoe on the foot, you don't want to wear it. No hypocrisy eh?