Israel Folau digs in for the fight of his professional life

Yes those scientists and philosophers were religious. As Lawrence Krauss has said, of course they were, it was the only game in town. The church founded those universities so it's no surprise that that's where the most highly educated people came from. The thing about science is it's evidence based which is why it's moved on. There are some good ideas in religion and maybe not so good ideas. Maybe it's time for a review, in fact several have been made. Here's one for the 10 commandments I: Do not condemn people on the basis of their ethnicity or color. II: Do not ever use people as private property. III: Despise those who use violence or the threat of it in sexual relations. IV: Hide your face and weep if you dare to harm a child. V: Do not condemn people for their inborn nature. VI: Be aware that you too are an animal and dependent on the web of nature, and think and act accordingly. VII: Do not imagine that you can escape judgment if you rob people with a false prospectus rather than with a knife. VIII: Turn off that f#$%^&*g cell phone. IX: Denounce all jihadists and crusaders for what they are: psychopathic criminals with ugly delusions. X: Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above. The author Christopher Hitchens, (who I have mixed feelings about) did point out that he would retain the original 8th and 9th commandments, thou shalt not steal, and thou shalt not bear false witness. I'm not saying these are perfect but at least a bit more relevant to our time

Hi Ray. Freedoms are usually taken for granted until they are lost. That happens slowly by a gradual erosion. Be careful how much control you are willing to give corporations to control work and your non-work related speech.

It can't be any clearer than AndyS summary above.

"How rugby Australia are so totally deluded to offer that $4mil contract to a 30 year old who is such a liability is completely beyond me." Mate, he was a ready-made huge brand, that would theoretically earn the RA back that money tenfold, due to being such a recogniseable global rugby superstar, irrespective of any shortcomings in the game, sadly. Now that he's gone and spectacularly p1ssed all over his own brand, he's become instantly worthless overnight, in fact its even worse.. he stinks so badly now, the RA can't distance themselves from him quick enough. What a stunning turnaround. Word is the upcoming Oxford Dictionary update has a new "Hero To Zero" listing with a stupid quote and a montrous photo of Izzy with a halo..

Hi RO, Simply put, Folau would be worse off by the value of his contract, plus damages. I can't see a win for RA in this, even if they've done the right thing according to the public mood, I feel like they'll be paying millions for him to not play.

Actually mate, his current employer hired him because of his profile...

Seriously? So to summarise: - CP says “Pacific Islanders…great cultures have been replaced by the superstition and fear of fundamental and extremist religion, and the rejection of science and tolerance. I say extremist because that’s what it is. And Folau knows what he is doing. It’s orchestrated and deliberate” - Joe says that is simply bashing Christianity and a gross overstatement - You call him a bigot and state that no-one is bashing Folau - It is observed that Joe didn’t even mention Folau, but was responding to the original post - You say yes he did, that he reckoned everyone pushing for action against Folau are bashing Christianity - It was again observed he was disputing the view on the effect of Christianity on the Pacific Islands, and the prejudices evident in the argument - You then decide that, actually, the original post was only being critical of people imposing their beliefs on others - It was observed that the post was very clearly talking about one particular set of beliefs, not beliefs in general - You then say that even so, it is still just a general point (notably, despite words in the original post like “superstition”, “extremist”, “orchestrated” and “deliberate”) - It was observed that if it were just a general point, it must cut both ways and would therefore be equally critical of people imposing their beliefs on Folau - So now the original post apparently only ever meant some individuals imposing their beliefs, nothing to do with Christianity as a faith? Joe is right, a masterclass in that "standard MO" you were talking to Fionn about when an argument that is can't be won. Oh, and apparently Joe is still a bigot...

I don't think the entire faith imposed their beliefs. It was the choice of individuals to do so. The argument has always been people imposing their beliefs, not bashing the concept of the faith.

So now you're agreeing that he is bashing Christianity but because they're imposing their beliefs. A very different argument from your first comment alluding to bigoted comments being defended. Also you're ignoring all the negative insinuations in his comments about Christianity that was brought to the Islands as extremist. Wouldn't that then make Pacific Island Christians extremists?? You seem to be changing your argument with every comment. Maybe your second comment above would be better directed at yourself and I quote "It’s the standard MO. They can’t win the argument that it is. So they try and make it into an argument that they can win."

If it is purely the imposition of any beliefs on those with different beliefs that you think CP is railing against, then he must be equally disgusted as others impose theirs on Folau. Anything less; if he is railing against the imposition of those specific beliefs; and Joe is quite entitled to dispute the one-sidedness of CP's 'bashing'.

He was very specific about the people he was bashing for imposing very specific beliefs? I don't think that changes it. But yeah my belief that Cooper is better than Foley is right so that's ok. Protected under the constitution. It's at the back.

No, he wasn't. He was very specific about which beliefs. And you then superimposed yours over the top. As an aside, I'm not sure anyone on this site can get on their high horse about beliefs being imposed on others. It is literally all that happens here.

Ray, I have a bit of experience in risk management and agrees with you that this risk have multitude of impacts, however once Folau breached his contract the damage is done and the controls to reduce the consequences (the mitigations in the contractual remedies) are weak. The focus of a risk analysis should therefore be on prevention and to understand this risk a root cause analysis would be helpful to suggest controls on how this risk could be effectively managed. Some of the root causes could include: - Folau's believes are incompatible with RA stated values - RA Board and leadership do not live up to their stated values, do not have a track record to consistently apply these values when they make decisions therefore the stated values are very weak - There is a almost religious believe that all problems will be fixed if the Wallabies can win again ("Win at all cost" mentality) - the inability for RA leadership to connect with Folau on a spiritual level to moderate his views (lack of diversity in thinking in leadership that do not reflect the views of the player base) If you look at these causes from a strategic risk perspective it is clear that there were gaps in the control strategy as only two controls were used: - a heart-to-heart meeting between the CEO and Folau that did not change Folau's fundamental views and - punitive clauses in his contract that will only come into affect after the risk realised.

No. He's bashing the people who are imposing their beliefs. For imposing their beliefs...

Yes, he is bashing Christianity in the context of what they've done to the Pacific Islands which I've said is not as one sided as he's trying to make out. You've then gone ahead and added the "bigotry" angle to my comment without looking at the thread that spawned it. If there's anyone trying to twist things here it is you.

RA in my view is an organisation with weak values. I will not be surprised if a major sponsor, e.g. Qantas, forced RA hand. The risk of losing the sponsor that bails them out financially vs the risk of over-reacting on Folau's contract... I hope this is a new found preparedness of RA to act in line with its values and not that RA has been pushed around by Qantas. If so, I hope to see more of it and hopefully new leadership at the Board that help RA to become a values driven organisation.

What I find hypocritical is that RA leaders wants to hold IF accountable for: - breaching his contract when they breached the confidentiality agreements with the Western Force by disclosing the contract to the VRU and then covered up by not "remembering" who made the copy of the contract and gave it to the VRU - breaching the code of conduct by pursuing his religious believes at the expense of RA stated values. The code of conduct states that RA's stated values are Passion, Integrity, Discipline, Respect and Teamwork. Values that RA Board and leadership clearly do not uphold as shown during recent frequent employee crisis and the way the Force fiasco was handled - continuing (see bullet below). RA "religiously" believes that everything will be "fixed" if the Wallabies can win - it is naïve but as real as Folau's religious believes. This "win at all cost" mentality has became the primary unspoken value that RA consistently lives up to: it can been seen at how Board members are selected, the rivalry between member states, how the Force fiasco was managed, the behaviour of the Chairman during press conferences, the coach's behaviour in the coaches box ...all the way to the RA employees on the Foxtel commentary team. Even Folau is an exponent as he is prepared to walk away from rugby - win at all costs! How ironic is it that RA pursue Folau as his religious believes are fundamentality in conflict with the their stated RA values while RA "Win at all cost" believe is also in conflict with these values. - This while RA is continuing to blow fire on the Western Force fiasco.... Last week RA claimed RA saved $14 million from axing the Force when the Force only costed them only $4.3 million to run in 2017 (player's pay was $2 million and the players and coaching staff was prepared to freeze their pay if the Force was not axed). Where did the other $10 million "savings" came from or are RA overstating the savings (lying)? Another illustration of the "win at all costs" mentality that will continue to overshadow the Integrity, Discipline, Respect and Teamwork stated values.

No offence Morsie but your comments reek of " I'm all right Jack" You don't have a problem with Folau's comments so that's it end of story. Maybe the world doesn't revolve around you. I guess it might but I'm pretty sure it doesn't.

So he’s not bashing people trying to impose their beliefs on others?

You’ve definitely gone ahead and replied without reading the thread that lead to my comment. As AndyS seems to be patiently trying to explain to you, that was in response to AndyFs comment replying to Cynicals rant on Christianity’s effects on the Pacific Islands above. If you can honestly read that and say he isn’t bashing Christianity than I can’t help you.