Isreal Folau BS.

**peteramjet** · 25-05-19, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by fandtm666

there not millions who said worse and did worse and were not punished
with some of those people being our elected leaders

i could not care less if some one is gay hetro bi who gives a toss but at the end
of the day we all have different views and in today's age of the keyboard warrior's
any one who dosn't agree with what one says they are brutally attacked online
by the minority who make the most noise.

All the relevant points seem to have been missed here.

Folau is not a nobody. He is a highly paid professional under contract to a business. That business has specific rules regarding social media posts. Folau agreed to those rules. Folau’s posts breached those business rules and, and as it has now been found, breached his contract to that business that subsequently enabled his termination.

This is not a case of an individual being punished for posting random thoughts or comments online. By the same token, this is it a case where Folau’s individual views are being criticised - he can say whatever he likes as an individual without criticism, which he does. Folau’s business persona, which is heavily linked and promoted through his social media presence, posted comments that have found to be in breach of his contract.

This is a case of a business being able to enforce a breach of a contract that its employees had agreed to, not an attack on an individuals comments or their right to free speech.

**george65** · 25-05-19, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by peteramjet

This is not a case of an individual being punished for posting random thoughts or comments online. By the same token, this is it a case where Folau’s individual views are being criticised - he can say whatever he likes as an individual without criticism, which he does. Folau’s business persona, which is heavily linked and promoted through his social media presence, posted comments that have found to be in breach of his contract.

This is a case of a business being able to enforce a breach of a contract that its employees had agreed to, not an attack on an individuals comments or their right to free speech.

Actually it's no where near that simple. If the contract with RA was unlawful or it's execution and application was, they are stuffed.

Firstly the wording of the contract as I read it to be specifies something like religious Views. They weren't his views. They were a passage from the bible, arguably, Jesus Views. Being sacked for repeating a verse from the bible on SM as written with no modification is going to be a real tough point for RA to justify. Had he Said I believe XXX or put anything else to it, I'd say different thing but a straight quote from the most read book in the world..... Good Luck RA.

The policy of the RA has been stated over and over that everyone of all race, religion gender etc must feel safe and welcome or whatever. They have alienated Folau for his religious Views which is illegal in most 1st world countries. Sure, it might upset the gays but then again, what doesn't? From a legal POV, who gets their Rights? Folau quoting text from his clearly deep religious beliefs or the gays that might be offended? The passage also mentioned drunks and fornicators so why isn't ussie being taken from them?

And who exactly was offended and why? If you are an atheist you don't believe in heaven or hell and would confront religion every day so why would you be offended at something that you think doesen't exist and therefor can't apply? Do these people get upset if somone says they have been Bad so santa won't be coming at Christmas?

If you are faithful, you know effing well that's from your faith and is the word of god or Jesus or whoever so your complaint would not be with folau but the bible itself..... If you could take exception tot he teachings of the faith you practice in the first place.

He made no link to RA in his post and from what I have read it was not made on RA property or on RA time, It was made in his own free time. If you are going to say well he's a representative, and everything is linked, where does it stop? Is he not permitted to shop at the supermarket of his choice because the competitor is a sponsor of his employer or is he only allowed to drink a certain beer when he goes to the pub with personal friends or..... I doubt there are too many stipulations what he can and can't do in his own free time and if there are, that is going to be for a real court to decide no a Kangaroo Court convened by his employers. And again, good luck telling him what he can and can't say about his religion.

RA can dream up whatever rules and conditions they like and act on them accordingly but they CAN NOT contravene the laws of the land and one of those is his right to practice his religion and beliefs thereof. In other words his employers playing thought police isn't going to wash in a real court.

I reckon his employers will be on VERY thin ground if he does take this to court which I'm sure he will. He's reportedly been to see the best in the biz of unfair dismissal cases so if they even Lodge a complaint, I'd be betting he has a Real good case of taking them to the cleaners.
Supposedly they already offered him a Million to get rid of him and he rejected it So I'd be thinking One, RA were worried from the start and 2, If he gets anything in any action, the next number is going to be WAAAY higher.

If he does lodge a case, I doubt money will be an issue. He'll have the backing of a lot of people who will no doubt get up a public fund for him and he'll probably have the backing of some part of the church.

Win loose or draw, RA has done huge damage to themselves. They also risk a strike/ walk out by the other Polynesian players whom are also very much on Folau's side in race and religion.

If he does take it to court, RA should give him what ever he wants to settle before they even get a hearing date and they have their arses handed to them.