Manly Sea Eagles players to boycott NRL match over pride jersey

[Golden Duck]

2 hours ago, Knob Oddy said:

Entirely legal.

How would you describe them? Would you say that it's not OK to be white?

 

I would dwacrobe Lauren Southern's t-shirt convenient for the ADL.

There's no shame in being white.

You could save a lot of time if you would just read Knob.

[Knob Oddy]

5 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

I would dwacrobe Lauren Southern's t-shirt convenient for the ADL.

There's no shame in being white.

You could save a lot of time if you would just read Knob.

I read alot.

So there's no shame in being white? No white guilt? 

Can we at least say that its ok to be white? Not good, just acceptable, like its ok

[Golden Duck]

46 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

I read alot.

So there's no shame in being white? No white guilt? 

Can we at least say that its ok to be white? Not good, just acceptable, like its ok

Ask the ADC.  Why do they pick and choose which display of the slogan they will denounce?

Knob, you are bad at trying to play word games.  You should stop trying to flamebait me.

 

Edited August 4, 2022 by Golden Duck

[psyche101]

9 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

How's it a fine line?  Jesus turned water into wine, at the encouragement of his Mother, the Virgin Mary.

Because people at games don't tipple glasses, more like sculling kegs. Not the wine, excess. 

9 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

I just think Issy got flamebaited.  Why are people offended by Hell if they don't believe in it?

I'm not a fan of Issy as a player. I always thought he was over rated.  Greg Inglis would have been a player for the Wallabies to pursue.

I can't condone his rants. They were written to insult people. And I see why he was removed from the league, I don't know mate. You're probably right, hard to say. Haines went from the hurricane to a dust devil, I think you can't really know until they get out there. Some just got it, some don't. 

[psyche101]

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Sure. They aren’t asking anything of anyone. Aren’t expressing hatred or violence. People should be free to believe what they want. 

What is wrong with you? 

Please show where anyone expressed hatred for the stance or were not allowed to have a belief? 

It was an agreement. They didn't want to wear the jersey so why would they even want to play a game that was highlighting diversity? 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Yeah cause that’s the same thing. Smh

Yes, it's tradition that's not compatible with the modern world.

Sydney Morning Herald.

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

When they start preaching that, I’ll be in full agreement with you.

What do you think the protest was about? 

It wasn't that they simply refuse to support, it violated a belief system that regards the gay community as sub human sinner's. 

Here, learn a tiny bit about the community you seem to be completely oblivious to. 

https://www.monash.edu/news/opinions/why-the-pacific-islands-are-no-gay-paradise

One region that has received very little media coverage when it comes to LGBTI issues is the Pacific. There are nine Pacific countries that still criminalise homosexuality. And LGBTI individuals in many of these countries are regularly subjected to homophobia, discrimination and persecution.

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

To just assume that represents them simply because they refused to validate homosexuality is a reach. 

They aren't asked to validate homosexuality.

Why do you keep repeating that lie? Is it a comprehension thing or a bigot thing?

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

You don’t see those threads cause you guys hold every other religion to a different standard. If it was Christian’s doing it you can bet it would be a hot topic here. 

What a steaming pile of BS.

Read the posts GD left for you. They refute this claim.

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Why are peoples personal sexual preferences a community cause? 

Because they are and have traditionally been a marginalised and persecuted sector of the community that we all belong to. By your reasoning would you also terminate the indigenous rounds? 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

No I don’t. No more than I think homosexual pride should be a factor in football games. 

It's not a factor, it's a community issue that the club supports.

Why do you hate the gay community so much? Is that a religious thing to?

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

considering they got their ass kicked without these guys, maybe just this once there could have been a little compromise. Seems like the club needs them as much as they need the club. 

The team needed them. They let the team down. That's the compromise. The club did what it does, play football. That's why it's there. 

They did compromise. Neither party had any grievance about the mutual arrangement.

Have you not noticed that in all the links provided by everyone including the OP? 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Well they obviously felt otherwise. Especially after they were told they must wear it or not play. At that point they were basically told to support a message that they clearly didn’t. 

So they shook hands and decided to put that one game aside. 

Exactly what is wrong with a mutual agreement? 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

LOL so you think it would have been ok for them to preach that homosexuality is a sin in interviews, and that would have been fine so long as they wore the jersey? 

I think it would have been the right thing to do. As it is they hid what is blatant homophobia under a collective religious blanket. Because they didn't have the guts to stand up and say individually that they hate the gay community. They let others speak for them collectively. Which is no surprise. They would probably receive quite some backlash from decent people over such stupid beliefs. 

That's my opinion you understand. 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Ok so they are hypocrites.

Your catching on. 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

It still changes nothing. Bottom line, these men felt conviction from personal beliefs. They felt strongly that they shouldn’t be supporting what that Jersey represented. They didn’t express any hatred or violence. Didn’t try to tell anyone else how they should feel about it. They just said it wasn’t for them, and were then told to compromise how they felt about it. To compromise what they believe to be the truth. No way man. That’s crazy. 

No, you're being an ass 

The game was going to promote celebration of diversity. I've posted the coaches comments. Read them again. 

They didn't want to be part of that. Jersey or not, that was going to be the theme on the billboards and around the stadium. They didn't want to be part of that either if they remain true to their beliefs. As repugnant as they are 

I keep pointing out that nobody was punished in any conceivable way. No contracts terminated. No action whatsoever taken. The players haven't said they feel they should be allowed to play. No hard feelings between the players and team.

How is an amicable mutual agreement crazy? 

[psyche101]

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

You are the one outraged. I’m the one pointing out there is nothing to be outraged about. You are the one preaching community moral standards as a moral high ground. The only thing I’m saying is good for them. I’m not outraged in the slightest. 

Bewildered is the word you are searching for here.

All I said is they let their team down and their decision is very disappointing for the sport as a whole. I don't agree with them and I feel they let a lot of people down.

Is any of that incorrect? 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Even for those who don’t believe in either?

Yep, still public holidays.

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

No certainly not. When everyone in the community is expected to support them I’ll be right there with you saying it’s wrong. 

They are the majority. They would have to support themselves wouldn't they,? Wouldn't that be exceedingly silly?

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I don’t. You miss the point completely. I don’t think anyone is being excluded. Lack of validation is not exclusion.

No players had to validate personally what their club does.

And they didn't validate anything by mutual agreement.

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Again, we both know that would have been a career ending move. 

Exactly, that is the reason why they chose to do it collectively through spokespersons. 

Do you get it now?

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I don’t have a problem. You do. You clearly think they should have worn the jersey and shut up about it. 

Yes you do have a problem. You're on an anti gay crusade wether you realise it or not. You really need reflection. 

Yes I do think they should have. I didn't say they should shut up about it, in fact that comment directly contradicts the one right above this. 

You didn't notice that did you? 

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I do think they should have been allowed to play, but whatev.

Why do you think they wanted to?

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

It’s not always easy to stand by your convictions. 

No. It's much easier to get a spokesman to fish out a carefully constructed broad excuse and cite religious beliefs as opposed to simply saying its a crime where we come from and we hate gay people. I mean that's the actual message when you remove the religious fluff isn't it. As you say, they have the right to express that and they did. You seem to want them to play a game that was themed in a way that offends their beliefs. Now that's crazy.

[psyche101]

7 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

 

What would you describe Lauren Southern's activities?

 

Oxygen theft.

[psyche101]

11 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Accept I’m sure they wanted to play the game. They just didn’t want to wear the Jersey. Who got boycotted here??

The game 

[psyche101]

11 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Accept I’m sure they wanted to play the game. They just didn’t want to wear the Jersey. Who got boycotted here??

Good thing your sure about it.

What about the players? Have you even seen a single comment from them?

You like to think you're a benchmark don't you. 

Did you notice at all that the club didn't tell them not to play, they withdrew themselves?

[psyche101]

8 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

We are all ignorant about something. If not knowing about one single thing is the standard for dismissal, then we should all be dismissed. 
 

But whatev. Do as you please. 

Perhaps it would be prudent to follow it up seeming as it displaced you comments?

[psyche101]

11 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

NTM gay people are not marginalized or oppressed. Accept in Muslim countries. No one seems to care much about that though. 

https://antigaylaws.org/

 

You are really out of touch. 

[Golden Duck]

Beliefs were respected.

Better include Muslims in the conversation, so we've got something to whinge about.

While we're at it, can we whinge about China trying to reeducate Muslims?  Or, is that better left for a Monday whinge?

[psyche101]

19 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Beliefs were respected.

Better include Muslims in the conversation, so we've got something to whinge about.

While we're at it, can we whinge about China trying to reeducate Muslims?  Or, is that better left for a Monday whinge?

Check back in 2025 for the Maria Falou followup.

[Abramelin]

On 8/4/2022 at 1:19 PM, psyche101 said:

Did you see how little the controversial jersey changed? I bet half of the spectators wouldn't even notice, and the other half would forget after five minutes. 

I vaguely remember seeing a news flash on a Dutch commercial channel a while ago.

I was reading a book at the time with the tv on. Then I heard cheering, and started watching the match. I like to watch rugby, but we hardly ever see it here. I didn't notice anything odd or out of the ordinary, not untill the commentator said something about the pride logo. Had he not mentioned it I wouldn't even have noticed it.

[Golden Duck]

Go back a few months to when Toby Rudolph descibed his plans after a win.

Quote

"Probably about 1000 beers. Go to Northies [pub], try and pull something. Anything will do, ...

An the response from the NRL:

Quote

"I was very disappointed with Toby's comments, they were inappropriate and should not have been said," Abdo told AAP.

"We are going to issue Toby with a formal warning and I know the club are going to counsel him so there is not a repeat.

"Respect for women is one of the foundations of our society and our players, as role models, need to be leaders in this area."

Things change, and change quickly.

https://amp.nine.com.au/article/fc7699a1-6681-4502-b3e8-0d6aa3774af8

 

[Knob Oddy]

29 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Go back a few months to when Toby Rudolph descibed his plans after a win.

An the response from the NRL:

Things change, and change quickly.

https://amp.nine.com.au/article/fc7699a1-6681-4502-b3e8-0d6aa3774af8

 

Wow. They really gave him a warning for stating the truth?

Doesn't seem very tolerant or inclusive to Toby

[Golden Duck]

1 minute ago, Knob Oddy said:

Wow. They really gave him a warning for stating the truth?

Doesn't seem very tolerant or inclusive to Toby

Open wide hear comes the chew chew twain.

[Knob Oddy]

2 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Open wide hear comes the chew chew twain.

Intolerance incarnate 

[Golden Duck]

8 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

Intolerance incarnate 

Who, the people projecting misogyny on to a someone that didn't mention women?

Using the word incarnate means you are talking about someone again!

[psyche101]

34 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Who, the people projecting misogyny on to a someone that didn't mention women?

Using the word incarnate means you are talking about someone again!

LOL.

From another "protector" of women at that!!!!

Only trans people are misogynistic.  

I'll post the Ricky Stewart controversy in two months. Is that long enough for this thread do you think? 

[Golden Duck]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

LOL.

From another "protector" of women at that!!!!

Only trans people are misogynistic.  

I'll post the Ricky Stewart controversy in two months. Is that long enough for this thread do you think? 

You may have to use large clear letters, a careful choice of words and include explanatory pictures. 

Some in the audience need to be spoon-fed or they are easily triggered.

Even then, it may not help.

But, they aren't bitter about anything

Edited August 10, 2022 by Golden Duck

[Knob Oddy]

18 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Who, the people projecting misogyny on to a someone that didn't mention women?

Using the word incarnate means you are talking about someone again!

Just that you don't address the points raised at all and play the man, not the ball.

I think that was incredibly intolerant to give a player a warning over his honest statements.

You think I'm an idiot, but didn't address the point.

Can't even tolerate a question, hence my comment about you being "intolerance incarnate"

Edited August 10, 2022 by Knob Oddy

[Knob Oddy]

16 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

You may have to use large clear letters, a careful choice of words and include explanatory pictures. 

Some in the audience need to be spoon-fed or they are easily triggered.

Even then, it may not help.

But, they aren't bitter about anything

You sound a bit triggered. Are you ok?

[Golden Duck]

42 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

You sound a bit triggered. Are you ok?

I'm super, thanks for asking.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Golden Duck

[Golden Duck]

44 minutes ago, Knob Oddy said:

Just that you don't address the points raised at all and play the man, not the ball.

I think that was incredibly intolerant to give a player a warning over his honest statements.

You think I'm an idiot, but didn't address the point.

Can't even tolerate a question, hence my comment about you being "intolerance incarnate"

Thr point was already addressed in the post to which you replied.