Friday, April 12, 2019

IF YOU WANT TO PLAY RUGBY IZZY GET A NEW AGENT.



A talented rugby union mid field back with some above average skills joins a religion with some strange to many beliefs,  mostly rooted in times long past.
Among those beliefs are some little publicised tenets around treatment and attitudes to homosexuality, usury, and women where the so called straight dominant male view dominates, even today in what some might see as enlightened society we live in.

Another very talented outside back again in the same code, with aerial skills largely unmatched by any player of the era,  who stands head and shoulders above all the talent currently available to the Wallabies, is a committed believer in another religion that has origins only a few hundred miles from where the founder of Player one's outfit began, one major difference being timing, player ones religion began around six hundred years later than that of player two.

Both the two belief systems had connectivity to the old testament, with a significant difference, Player one's outfit has endured over one and a half millennia with very minor change in its practice while the belief systems of that of player two have evolved with many divergences and reformations many that are still under significant changes as we speak to appear a better fit with the third millennia

Mysteriously the two players are subject to extreme difference in their treatment by the powers that are contractually in command. Player one it seems has a freedom to depart his current team in the midst of a revival, long awaited by the fans, to make a culturally inclusive appearance in support of the victims of the recent shooting by the Australian nutter,  complete with  fuzz on his chin, a silly little cap on his head and accompanied by a supplicant media. This was after an incident around a year ago where he declined to continue to wear a jersey carrying the logo of a major club sponsor that just happened to be a money lender for interest payment. A sudden and rather 'road to Damascus' change of heart that resulted in a seperate set of jerseys created for player one sans the BNZ logo in what could be viewed as being somewhat at odds with a perception of contractual obligation. I guess the gnomes at the Aussie bank went along with the mantra, 'even bad publicity is better than being ignored'.
Every time Player one makes his religion a part of his image he signals to some,  offensive support for his anti women, anti gay, extreme judicial punishment regime, anti western banking practice religious beliefs.

Poor old Player two in a death wish inspired social media outburst makes a part of his belief system clear as to what awaits sinners including queers who might be doing stuff that he sees as bad, possibly allied to the Tasmanian State Government act in making gender on birth certificates "Optional".

As soon as the ARU finds their errant player two,  it seems he will be disconnected from his income stream.

That is why getting a better agent might be a good next step.

As for the woeful Wallabies the up coming World Cup chances just took a massive dive, Waratah coach Daryl Gibson will be having a beer with Michael Cheika in a Wtf happened there moment.


18 comments:

Kimbo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kimbo said...

Mysteriously the two players are subject to extreme difference in their treatment by the powers that are contractually in command...Every time Player one makes his religion a part of his image he signals to some, offensive support for his anti women, anti gay, extreme judicial punishment regime, anti western banking practice religious beliefs.

Nope. Nothing "mysterious" about the difference in treatment. Yes, both are leveraging off the profile provided by their employer to promote their respective religions. However, say all you want about SBW "signalling" homophobia etc., he does not explicitly say it. Folau did. And he's still free to say it publicly. Just not while he's on the payroll of Rugby Australia, and when his employer and their primary sponsor consider (rightly, IMHO) a breach of his contract has occurred - especially after graciously let Folau off with a warning last year.

Psycho Milt said...

It is annoying to see people vilified for holding unpopular opinions, but this case is a bit different. It involves a professional entertainer who's being paid a lot of money under a contract that includes the requirement not to say stuff in public that will damage his employer's brand (for example, by expressing unpopular opinions). I personally wouldn't sign my freedom of expression away like that, but he did, willingly. (NB: I know it's easy for me to say I wouldn't sign, since no-one's going to offer a lot of money for my entertainment value. Let's settle for "I entertain the fond hope I wouldn't sign...")

Last year the entertainer ignored his contract and damaged the employer's brand by expressing unpopular opinions. He was let off with a warning. Now, in a big "Fuck you" to his employer, he's done the same thing again and has unsurprisingly been given the arse. I'm not seeing any cause for sympathy there - he effectively chose to get himself fired.

Kimbo said...

@ Psycho Milt

Yep. yet again, freedom of speech does not include freedom from consequences. Nor does it guarantee someone else has to provide a platform. Hence retail employees being paid $17.50 don't get to proselytise on their boss' time while serving customers at the check-out. And courtesy of the fame and fortune that Folau gets from Rugby Australia and their sponsor Qantas, and off which Folau leverages his public profile and religion, his twitter-content is covered by that contract.

Andrei said...

The problem is Milt that if he held the "popular" opinion on this matter the powers that be would be falling all over themselves to give him a forum to express himself.

Thus can the population at large convinced that black is white.

Controlling the conversation is the Goal of the Godless left as we know and they are very good at it.

It is all symptomatic of a decadant dying culture

Kimbo said...

@ Andrei

Why is it right-wing and/or Christian conservatives complain when they receive competition in the public space seeking to influence and control speech and actions? No, in Folau's case "controlling the conversation" is the goal of corporate business. It's the golden rule in action: he who has the gold makes the rules.

But now Folau is free to tweet what he wants free of the filthy restraining lucre of his employer and sponsor...who deemed that their business would be adversely affected by Folau's tweets. So a win-win for all concerned.

Are they right in that assumption, based on pressure from LGBT activists and the media? Maybe, maybe not. Their business, their money so their prerogative to decide and act.

Andrei said...

Not complaining about competition in the realm of public discourse Kimbo - pointing out that in fact the certain worldviews are being shut out of public debate.

The truth is human beings are sexual creatures for reasons based rooted biology and that sexual urges, which are extremely powerful may become misdirected and that misdirected sexual urges are maladaptive - you cannot argue this, it is as factual as the sun rising in the East.

From the point of view of the long term benefit to society or a culture it is those who successfully raise lots of children who maintain the values of their parents who will determine the future of society.

This is why the West is doomed - Western children are being taught sex is all about how you make your genitals feel good and not about procreation which is considered an impediment to living a rich and fulfilled life.

The whole agenda is ultimately self defeating.





Kimbo said...

pointing out that in fact the certain worldviews are being shut out of public debate.

Er, how so? Folau is still free to tweet (a public forum), and you are still free to post in this public forum. Doesn't mean your opinions have to be liked, let alone agreed with, or not subject to derision, ridicule and contempt. Was an arrangement the early church was happy to accept.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

So the loosingest Rugby side in history has sacked its best player because he quoted from the Old Testament and the CEO of the ARU's major sponsor happens to be a poofter. So was Heinrich Himmler and they both have quite a lot in common.

The Veteran said...

There are extremes and extremists in all religions ... Christians, Muslims, Jews et al. No one religion has a mortgage on extremism (or atheists for that matter). The vast majority of adherents look to and adhere to can be described as the positive tenants of their particular faith and shy away from the perversions 'preached' by those whose beliefs are rooted in what might have been acceptable in times long gone.

The world evolves; religions evolve. IF is a highly paid professional and he has a obligation to the people that pay him that he does nothing to damage 'the' brand ... put it another way. In the military you are of course allowed to have political opinions but you can't flaunt them publicly as a serving soldier. You know that when you take the Queen's shilling. IF knows that too but he believes he has a greater duty to his God to express them the way he does.

Sorry IF, you can't.

Nothing to so with free speech either. Off contract and IF is free to say what he wants to as I don't see his message as incitement to violence but rather a warning based on his honestly held beliefs.

Psycho Milt said...

Not complaining about competition in the realm of public discourse Kimbo - pointing out that in fact the certain worldviews are being shut out of public debate.

Unpopular world views always face strong opposition. When my mother was young, an entertainer expressing Folau's views would have been considered a role model for youth, while one expressing the view that homosexuals should be welcome in society and allowed to marry would have struggled to find anyone willing to put a microphone in front of them. Now it's the reverse. Times change, sucks to be the one holding the currently-unpopular views.

Andrei said...

Dear Psycho (a totally nom de plume) just because a mediocre, self serving politicians listen to the whining and screeching of a vocal minority that have hijacked the media have a brainfart and pass a law to shut them up does not mean that that law is good, wise or even sane. BTW these people are never satified they will always want more which is why having "normalized" homosexuality we are now getting all sorts of other "sexualities" and "genders" demanding recognition

In fact gay "marriage" is a Monty Pythonesqe absurdity and changes the meaning of an almost universal human institution that was designed to encourage both parents of a child to take responsibility for that child and their other children into one that validates sodomy and adult self absorbtion.

Further more all the arguments that "gays" used to justify being given what they want also could be used by pedophiles - cue the outrage which is the response of the left when presented an argument they know is intellectually sound and that cannot be countered

I will tell you something else - if Bill English had been a man of substsance and led the fight against this abominable travesty he would have been Prime Minister today. Instead he was conspicuously absent during the debate, allowing the cultural vandals to get their own way and demponstrating that he was not a man to vote for but a craven coward who thought he could have his cake and eat it.

"C'est La Vie" - Gay Marriage is a significant marker in the decline of Western civilization. A sign of a culture that has lost its way and is a spent force. You are not going to see its implementation in East Asia or Africa anytime soon. Even in the Eastern provinces of NATOSTAN like Poland there is significant resistance to its implimentation.

Andrei said...

Vet

"The world evolves; religions evolve"

And as things evolve the unfit are weeded out and the fit persist - and given even with the perversions of modern medical science that homosexuality is non fecund while the traditional male female one is the writing is on the wall. You probably wont live to see it but the future of this country is almost certainly East Asian in race, culture and outlook

That's assuming of course Humanity survives this century

"When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:"


The Veteran said...

Andrei .... with respect I think you have missed the point. IF has a duty to obey the code of conduct that he signed up to as a employee of the ARU. Don't like it, don't sign up to it, go a play for a country (like Japan) who wouldn't give a fig about your views on life.

Yep Andrei ... religion evolves. Don't think too many 'christian' religions hold too fast to that expressed in Deuteronomy 21:18-21 ... If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you.

Bit harsh ... even then.

Andrei said...

Vet - Deuteronomy is a book of the Old Testament, part of the Torah and records the law of Moses along with Leviticus which is the Priestly code. Although some of these laws and codes have passed into Christianity and even remain in modern secular legislation these books are of historical and scholarly interest and have been for 2 millenia

The Davids of this world love to quote these books to make Christianity seem harsh and ridiculous but almost never quote the Gospels, probably never actually.

You know as well as I do Vet the ARU would have no problem with a player publically supporting "Gay Rights" and you also know the reason for this controversy is because the ARU are surrendering to the baying mob not from any deep seated conviction

Anyway right now we are seeing woman's sport being ruined by the same mindless baying mob as men compete in top level women's sport as women.

The funny thing is in all my years of going to church I have never once heard a homily or sermon discussing homosexuality - not once!

I guess every Orthodox Christian understands that Homosexuality is not part of God's long term plan for us but is a feature of a broken world . I wouldn't say all Homosexuals are going to hell because I'm sure that is not the case but those who corrupt youth are certainly on very shaky ground

"But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea."

That is from the Gospel according to Matthew not Deutronomy

Here is the first Litany from the Orthodox Service of Betrothal - the first part of the Wedding service and I draw your attention to this petition within it.

"and that there maybe grant unto them Children for the continuation of the race..."

And the blessing of being granted children (and even grandchildren at one point) is a recurring feature of this service.


I don't give a shit what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home but to put those same sex relationships on the same footing as (potentially) reproductive ones is an abomination

The raising of our kids is the most important thing most of us do in this life - but modern progressive thought seeks to undermine committment to that with its active promotion of homosexuality and abortion.

I will tell you this, there are going to be a lot of sad old lonely people in this country in thirty years - I suppose that is one reason why the push for euthenasia is on

David said...

The Davids of this world love to quote these books to make Christianity seem harsh and ridiculous but almost never quote the Gospels, probably never actually.

OK Andrei, show me the bit in the Gospels where Jesus condemns homosexuals, adulterers, apostates, be stoned to death, and I will quote them. You can't, because Jesus didn't.

If Xtians no longer accept the OT rules, why don't they rip it out of their Bibles? Because Jesus didn't say what they want him to say.

I don't give a shit what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home but to put those same sex relationships on the same footing as (potentially) reproductive ones is an abomination

Then you DO give a shit, but clarity of though has never been your forte.

Andrei said...

WTF are you on about David????

Christianity has never stoned people for anything - never called for it that I know of.

The Torah is part of the Heritage of Christianity - it was familiar to the apostles

In fact the Apostles used the Septuagint as their scriptures (we know this because they are quoted in the NT) and that has carried over. Protestant Christianity used the Masoritic Text for the OT but that actually post-dates Christianity but that is another story.

If you understand Christianity as I have received it then you would understand that God our Creator gift us free will - the freedom to choose our own actions for ourselves for better or for worse - You can drink a glass of sulphuric acid if you want, it would be a very bad choice and would have severly negative consequences but you can do it. I personally would advise you against it but I'm not going to stop you.

Same with everything else - I actually lean towards libitarianism politically

The thing is David the most likely way someone is going to acheive long term happiness and fullfilment is making a good marriage and raising a family - it not foolproof and its not the only recipe but it is the most likely path to acheiving that for most - if you listtened to that litany I posted above you will hear that contained within the petitions as well.

We know that there are a lot of unhappy people living in our time and place and that those who identify as "gay" have far higher rates of mental illness than average and far, far higher rates than those living in stable families. Its no secret but the interpretation of why might be disputed.

There is a lot of chatter among our elites about controlling what we eat to maintain good physical health - they propose sugar taxes (for our own good of course) as an example

But there is far less interest in promoting lifestyle choices that promote good mental and/or spiritual health - in fact just the reverse it seems

For me to even suggest that a promiscuous "gay" lifestyle might have negative consequences on physical, mental and spiritual health might be considered hate speech but then again the evidence that this is so is seems fairly compelling.

The most precious thing I have in this world are my kids - I have thirty years of my life invested in them

Psycho Milt said...

... those who identify as "gay" have far higher rates of mental illness than average and far, far higher rates than those living in stable families.

Maybe criminalising and persecuting them would help?