Wallabies coach Michael Cheika has defended the rights of his star fullback Israel Folau to speak out against same-sex marriage, saying the team respects each other’s right to an opinion.
Folau sparked a Twitter backlash by revealing he will not support gay marriage, becoming the first high-profile sportsperson to have publicly announced their opposition.
It came after numerous sporting organisations — including the Australian Rugby Union — declared their support for a ‘yes’ vote in the government’s postal survey.
Folau’s views are also at odds with outspoken former Test skipper David Pocock while current captain Michael Hooper has also voiced his support for gay marriage this week.
In camp with the Wallabies in Canberra ahead of their Rugby Championship Test against Argentina, Cheika said Folau had the right to voice his views and didn’t believe it would cause a rift among his players.
“I don’t see how it could make a division within the team,” Cheika said.
“This is a national issue and, for everyone, respect is king.
“A lot of people have different opinions about lots of things in our team and our team is a reflection of Australia.
“And definitely within our team culture … there’s been a real camaraderie and internally we’ve got 100 per cent respect for everyone’s opinions on all matters.”
Cheika wasn’t concerned that Folau, who is a devout Christian, would be distracted by the response to his comment, with more than 3500 replies on Twitter.
“You’d have to think he’d know that that would happen,” Cheika said.
Former Welsh rugby great Gareth Thomas, who is gay, used the middle finger emoji to respond to Folau’s tweet.
Ex-Australian cricketer Shane Watson tweeted a link to a newspaper story about Folau and his netball star fiancee Maria Tutaia and wrote “Love should have no boundaries”.
Mike
Guest
No it's not derogatory, sorry. Not even close.
Mike
Guest
Of course - anyone who disagrees with the vocal people must never express their opinion.
Mike
Guest
Gregan and Eales are in the Old Testament. Unfortunately we are in the New
Garry Edwards
Guest
The whole thing, the controversy, the, he said she said sideshow is the means by which the SSM activists are eroding away the morality the principles on which some people were raised and if they are weak enough or liberalised enough to yield and vote Yes than so be it. And be aware this is a litmus test for Turnbull... Oh! You didn't know that, don't take your eye off the ball mate. As for me I don't hide I am who I am I don't bow to peer pressure and I sure as hell will never need to be reamed for a refit for bending over for anybody, government, media group,or lobbyist. I'll be voting NO. Now can we get over it and focus on more relevant issues like how do we stop these maniacs in Canberra from allowing Australia to become a third world country and as a gap filler can we have some half decent Rugby issues to contemplate.
mickyo
Guest
After the ARU, Cricket Australia, Collingwood the NRL and everyone else backed SSM, i want to know there views on banning the Burqa, dogs on leads at Parks, solar power V coal, ab or tion etc and every other social issue before i make my mind up!!!. Seriously all this crap has turned me against it, because of the principle of these orgs just staying out of these social agendas. makes me sick quite frankly
Taylorman
Guest
Nope, not unless you then say you respect what SSM couples are trying to achieve in life.
Taylorman
Guest
So single people dont count?
Drongo
Guest
You think Israel Folau and David Pocock are Prima Donnas? Get a grip, Both are as genuine as they come and believe what they say, are totally consistent and put many hours of charity work behind their words. What do you do?
P. Dantick.
Guest
I thought I would give my teenage daughter the form. It's her future not mine. I married opposite sex in both of my previous weddings, and not planning on a third.
P. Dantick.
Guest
It would be closer to the truth, yes. Constitution very hard to change (need referendum), legislation just needs majority in House of Representatives plus majority of Senate. As meerkat says 'simples'! This not place for teaching Australian government. Especially since I got terminating pass in the subject half a century ago!
There is a basic question for any person to answer. Does same sex marriages influence your life in any negative manner? The answer should be no for 99.999% of all people. What someone else does in their personal lives that do not negatively impact the day to day living of society should not ever become an issue, live and let live. Besides when Folau says he won't support it, he doesn't say I will fight the constitutional court with every fibre om my being to stop this from ever happening. In my view he should just have said nothing.
double agent
Guest
I read somewhere that in the last census 48000 people said they were part of a SSM couple. It's certainly a lot of fuss about 0.2% of the population.
mickyo
Guest
I don't believe that that 2 gay men, 1 bisexual man, 2 bisexuals women and 1 lesbian who is a relationship with one of the bi sexual women should be allowed to get married all together in one ceremony, like the 3 gay men that recently all married each other in Columbia. Does disagreeing with that make me disrespectful to people human rights ?. Or does it say, well i am drawing a line and saying i don't want that in my society
Machooka
Roar Guru
Anyone... ?
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
Bible rev2.0 That would be a fun read. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors Ute. From the book of Bray, passage 4:15 "And Sir George of Gregan doth smote the mighty All Black by knocking the orb from his hand" And passage 19:99 "And John of Eales did hold aloft the mighty golden Chalice and decreed that his troops did earn the spoils of war."
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
What is the difference between our constitution and and commonwealth legislation? If I reword my statement to say "Laws" instead of constitution, would that be better?
Timbo (L)
Roar Guru
Or a governing body wants to take your team.
George Maharris
Guest
yes it should be briefly debated in parliament s a social issue should and then if somebody feels strongly one way or another take it to the next election as a policy issue. This post it ballot/survey is just yet nother distraction to keep us all occupied with inconsequential things instead of getting our blood boiled about important issues that would truly better us a society. As i said Yes, No, doesn't matter.
Brizvegas
Guest
Its a NO from me which is my decision based on the indecision of what it all actually means. Now how will I be ridiculed or lambasted for my decision? Lets see.
George Maharris
Guest
they are important issues to me because they are important issues for everyone, or atleast they should be! SSM is of little real significance to all but a small minority of society. What really changes if it is voted no or yes? Nothing.