NRL General Discussion Thread

[Foordy]

Waddell gone for 5 matches for an eye gouge on Tino

 

[Organix]

it's interesting that the NRL respect the players choice to breech the code of conduct. i wouldn't have thought that would happen

No? Not with all the drama that would cause? This is the NRL we are talking about. The same NRL that was a shining light in the DeBellin case?

 

[Foordy]

No? Not with all the drama that would cause? This is the NRL we are talking about. The same NRL that was a shining light in the DeBellin case?

now you're comparing a player who was charged with rape to players who don't want to wear a certain clothing item because of religious grounds. you're really grasping at straws.

if anyone is actually being discriminated against, it is these 7 Manly players who are being ostracised based on their religious views. (you should be careful, you might be guilty of breaching the Anti Discrimination you keep referring to in this thread)


Disclaimer: I hate Manly, I'm not religious and i'm pro gay rights. I just don't think people should be forced to go against their beliefs to make a political statement.

 

[Organix]

now you're comparing a player who was charged with rape to players who don't want to wear a certain clothing item because of religious grounds. you're really grasping at straws.

if anyone is actually being discriminated against, it is these 7 Manly players who are being ostracised based on their religious views. (you should be careful, you might be guilty of breaching the Anti Discrimination you keep referring to in this thread)


Disclaimer: I hate Manly, I'm not religious and i'm pro gay rights. I just don't think people should be forced to go against their beliefs to make a political statement.

No, I'm speaking to the integrity and track record of the sporting body. Also, I have not spoken against their personal rights at all. You might not like it, but the facts care nothing for your feelings. I 100% respect their rights to practice their religion as long as their religious practices do not impinge on the rights of others. Simple.

Funny how people are twisting this.

Do you not think that their refusal to wear this jersey is a public display of their belief that gay people do not have the right to marry?

Just answer that one question with a yes or no. It doesn't matter if it is right or wrong of them.

 

[Foordy]

No, I'm speaking to the integrity and track record of the sporting body. Also, I have not spoken against their personal rights at all. You might not like it, but the facts care nothing for your feelings. I 100% respect their rights to practice their religion as long as their religious practices do not impinge on the rights of others. Simple.

Funny how people are twisting this.

Do you not think that their refusal to wear this jersey is a public display of their belief that gay people do not have the right to marry?

Just answer that one question with a yes or no. It doesn't matter if it is right or wrong of them.

I think it is a display of their religious beliefs. a display that wouldn't have occurred if they weren't backed into a corner by their employer.

p.s. apparently some of the players who would have been called in to replace these 7 also refused to play on religious grounds.

 

[Organix]

I think it is a display of their religious beliefs. a display that wouldn't have occurred if they weren't backed into a corner by their employer.

p.s. apparently some of the players who would have been called in to replace these 7 also refused to play on religious grounds.

Oh, I absolutely agree with you in that regard, but that wasn't a yes or no answer.

 

[BroncosFever]

It's easy; you make it clear to your signings when they come to sign on to play that the NRL has a code of conduct that specifically states that "Rugby League is a game for all, with a place for all" and "participants must demonstrate the greatest levels of respect, protecting the rights, dignity and worth of every person regardless of their gender, ability/disability, sexual orientation, cultural background, or religion", and if they cannot do that then they should not sign. These players have breached their contract in relation to the code of conduct. Simple. It is clearly written in black and white and they CHOSE to join in that contract willingly. By doing so, they have effectively abandoned any rights to complain.

That will never pass, not now, not in 100 years from now, not ever.

Do you not think that their refusal to wear this jersey is a public display of their belief that gay people do not have the right to marry?

Their refusal to wear the jersey is a public display of their religious beliefs. That's all it is, stop reading into it and trying to push an agenda.

 

[Super Freak]

I've said it enough that it's a breachof the code of conduct. It's about disrespecting others openly.

In what way is it breaching the code of conduct when religious beliefs are included in the code of conduct? It makes mention of protecting the beliefs of people from different cultural backgrounds or religion.

 

[Sproj]

Oh, I absolutely agree with you in that regard, but that wasn't a yes or no answer.

It isn’t a yes or no issue. I (and I think most people on here) get where you are coming from and how you’ve arrived there. It seems logical to think that these players are discriminating against others because they refuse to where this jersey and because we have LGBTABCXYZ rights thrown down our throats every single day.

And those who are loud on these do tend to campaign as strong and hard as anyone else on any other issue out there. Religious people are also seen as zealots, intolerant and stupid. I’m not saying this is what you think but it has mentioned several times in this thread alone. So you have one group seen as victims and one seen as perpetrators and this seems to be the area you are venturing into as your main argument.

Regardless, these players did not come out actively against this community, this was forced on them by their employer. They are making a silent protest against this imposition on their rights to express their beliefs and it is being represented in the media as being because of culture and religion. It may well be so of it may be because they, like my earlier mentioned workmates, simply don’t want their employer to have the power to tell them what to think, say, express and believe.

This is what freedom of expression is about whether you or others like it or not. And freedom of expression is a fundamental right that trumps activist agendas. Remember, this is a football team with paid employees, not a social justice movement with passionate activists.

 

[Kimlo]

It isn’t a yes or no issue. I (and I think most people on here) get where you are coming from and how you’ve arrived there. It seems logical to think that these players are discriminating against others because they refuse to where this jersey and because we have LGBTABCXYZ rights thrown down our throats every single day.

And those who are loud on these do tend to campaign as strong and hard as anyone else on any other issue out there. Religious people are also seen as zealots, intolerant and stupid. I’m not saying this is what you think but it has mentioned several times in this thread alone. So you have one group seen as victims and one seen as perpetrators and this seems to be the area you are venturing into as your main argument.

Regardless, these players did not come out actively against this community, this was forced on them by their employer. They are making a silent protest against this imposition on their rights to express their beliefs and it is being represented in the media as being because of culture and religion. It may well be so of it may be because they, like my earlier mentioned workmates, simply don’t want their employer to have the power to tell them what to think, say, express and believe.

This is what freedom of expression is about whether you or others like it or not. And freedom of expression is a fundamental right that trumps activist agendas. Remember, this is a football team with paid employees, not a social justice movement with passionate activists.

Couldn't agree more.

I wouldn't in a million years wear an "LGBT" uniform if I had an employer and they just suddenly turned up and said you have to wear this for the week. Work is work, **** off with politics.

I'll give you an example of how professional employers would act. When I was at Apple 10 years ago, (Apple has always been very pro-lgbt) upon gaining employment, they offered everyone 2 Apple work shirts, and one with a rainbow Apple logo. You were never told what it is, or that you have to wear it or that you're a bad person if you don't. It's simply given to you and you do what you want with it.

That's how you handle it professionally. You don't put every single person on the spot to make a decision where they either have to agree or face very real public backlash. That's not taking care of your employees, that's putting them in a really shitty position.

 

[Organix]

It isn’t a yes or no issue. I (and I think most people on here) get where you are coming from and how you’ve arrived there. It seems logical to think that these players are discriminating against others because they refuse to where this jersey and because we have LGBTABCXYZ rights thrown down our throats every single day.

And those who are loud on these do tend to campaign as strong and hard as anyone else on any other issue out there. Religious people are also seen as zealots, intolerant and stupid. I’m not saying this is what you think but it has mentioned several times in this thread alone. So you have one group seen as victims and one seen as perpetrators and this seems to be the area you are venturing into as your main argument.

Regardless, these players did not come out actively against this community, this was forced on them by their employer. They are making a silent protest against this imposition on their rights to express their beliefs and it is being represented in the media as being because of culture and religion. It may well be so of it may be because they, like my earlier mentioned workmates, simply don’t want their employer to have the power to tell them what to think, say, express and believe.

This is what freedom of expression is about whether you or others like it or not. And freedom of expression is a fundamental right that trumps activist agendas. Remember, this is a football team with paid employees, not a social justice movement with passionate activists.

I agree on principle, but not in practice. I would like to point out that I haven't made any personal attacks on the players or their character, only that what they have done is technically a breach in the code of conduct and no matter how it came to pass, that is what it is. I actually do feel bad for them, but would hope that serious questions were asked in relation to how one chooses an employer.

The same goes for all of us. I think a lot of people are almost forced into a workplace purely out of need.

Furthermore, I think this issue should highlight Manly and the NRL as businesses that can happily write words on pages and then not actively live them. This incident is not the first.

Couldn't agree more.

I wouldn't in a million years wear an "LGBT" uniform if I had an employer and they just suddenly turned up and said you have to wear this for the week. Work is work, **** off with politics.

I'll give you an example of how professional employers would act. When I was at Apple 10 years ago, (Apple has always been very pro-lgbt) upon gaining employment, they offered everyone 2 Apple work shirts, and one with a rainbow Apple logo. You were never told what it is, or that you have to wear it or that you're a bad person if you don't. It's simply given to you and you do what you want with it.

That's how you handle it professionally. You don't put every single person on the spot to make a decision where they either have to agree or face very real public backlash. That's not taking care of your employees, that's putting them in a really shitty position.

Honestly, nor would I wear one, and I never said they should either. In fact, I voiced my reasons as to why earlier.

I will here point out that this incident highlighted a number of posters who seem to hold rather negative views towards the LGBTQ+ community. I have not been on here screaming about their rights, but rather responding logically to voices which seem to support the view that they do not have equal rights. In saying that, I respect people's right to think that way, but I also have the right to respond in turn and hopefully provide an alternative viewpoint or change a person's mind.

Not sure why I am now a target for pointing out the logical flaws in all the poor arguments here, but I will just leave it. It's not worth more of my time and people are only annoyed with it, so I apologise for being annoying, but certainly not for anything I have said. I do understand how it feels, and maybe people need some time to think more about it, or maybe not.

Peace

 

[Tim K]

No, I'm speaking to the integrity and track record of the sporting body. Also, I have not spoken against their personal rights at all. You might not like it, but the facts care nothing for your feelings. I 100% respect their rights to practice their religion as long as their religious practices do not impinge on the rights of others. Simple.

Funny how people are twisting this.

Do you not think that their refusal to wear this jersey is a public display of their belief that gay people do not have the right to marry?

Just answer that one question with a yes or no. It doesn't matter if it is right or wrong of them.

I’m not sure if your base assumption is correct in this argument. You are assuming an intent out of silence when the players in mention have not made a statement, or an observable behaviour that can be judged to have impinged the rights of another.

There are plenty of religious homophobes who observably act out of an externalised disgust reflex of another’s sexual behaviour. Rather than a spiritual compassion or religious concern for another’s eternal welfare. But it’s difficult to assume either out of silence.

Regardless of the fact I disagree with someone’s religions conclusions, I think there is space for someone holding that religious belief to both act relationally accepting and loving toward another, while also ideologically disagreeing with them. And in this Manly scenario, it is difficult to see how the players in mention have been given an opportunity to express that nuance.

 

[Big Del]

Waddell gone for 5 matches for an eye gouge on Tino

Fckn good !
His defence was weak a piss . My fingers were never in Tino`s eye . Other than when they were .

 

[Tim K]

I agree on principle, but not in practice. I would like to point out that I haven't made any personal attacks on the players or their character, only that what they have done is technically a breach in the code of conduct and no matter how it came to pass, that is what it is. I actually do feel bad for them, but would hope that serious questions were asked in relation to how one chooses an employer.

The same goes for all of us. I think a lot of people are almost forced into a workplace purely out of need.

Furthermore, I think this issue should highlight Manly and the NRL as businesses that can happily write words on pages and then not actively live them. This incident is not the first.

Honestly, nor would I wear one, and I never said they should either. In fact, I voiced my reasons as to why earlier.

I will here point out that this incident highlighted a number of posters who seem to hold rather negative views towards the LGBTQ+ community. I have not been on here screaming about their rights, but rather responding logically to voices which seem to support the view that they do not have equal rights. In saying that, I respect people's right to think that way, but I also have the right to respond in turn and hopefully provide an alternative viewpoint or change a person's mind.

Not sure why I am now a target for pointing out the logical flaws in all the poor arguments here, but I will just leave it. It's not worth more of my time and people are only annoyed with it, so I apologise for being annoying, but certainly not for anything I have said. I do understand how it feels, and maybe people need some time to think more about it, or maybe not.

Peace

 

[Tim K]

Your definitely not a target. I think your just a conversational stand in or interlocutor for some. I think your personal intent and the bulk of your arguments are comendable and really useful for helping all of us flesh out our own ideas. This thread could have been cesspool without thoughtful arguments from people like yourself.

 

[Organix]

I’m not sure if your base assumption is correct in this argument. You are assuming an intent out of silence when the players in mention have not made a statement, or an observable behaviour that can be judged to have impinged the rights of another.

There are plenty of religious homophobes who observably act out of an externalised disgust reflex of another’s sexual behaviour. Rather than a spiritual compassion or religious concern for another’s eternal welfare. But it’s difficult to assume either out of silence.

Regardless of the fact I disagree with someone’s religions conclusions, I think there is space for someone holding that religious belief to both act relationally accepting and loving toward another, while also ideologically disagreeing with them. And in this Manly scenario, it is difficult to see how the players in mention have been given an opportunity to express that nuance.

Cheers, for your responses, but I'm not continuing with this topic here any more. I think I would only be repeating myself, or rephrasing things. If you want to talk further, you can message me privately.

 

[Cult]

I’m pretty disappointed in some of you. Wearing a tinge of a rainbow should not be a political issue and hiding behind outdated religious views doesn’t cover up that you are a bigot. This shouldn’t be an issue at all and Manly have every right to celebrate inclusion, given one of their ex-players is massively involved in those communities.

These opinions hurt people. Statistically there would be numerous gay men in the NRL, more so in the NRLW and knowing half of your 17 disagree with you even existing would hurt. Stop defending their right to choose whether people should exist. Because they do exist.

 

[Sproj]

Cheers, for your responses, but I'm not continuing with this topic here any more. I think I would only be repeating myself, or rephrasing things. If you want to talk further, you can message me privately.

And on this point, you have been really civil in your discussion and as mentioned above, it is because of this that the discussion has has mostly been pretty well done by most posters.

Thank you for being so civil about it all.