- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined April 2019
0
Views
0
Published
2
Comments
Published
Comments
Daniel, for me this is a freedom of speech issue. It is also a freedom of religion issue. In our democracy we get to say and believe what we want to say and believe. There are some constraints – libel laws and incitement of violence. Israel Folau is communicating his beliefs. He was not advocating violence or defaming others.
When someone says something outrageous freedom of speech also allows us to ridicule them. But when ridicule is changed to punishment speech is not free.
Rugby union would be a more inclusive, kinder place without Israel Folau and his backwards views
There is a great distinction between the right to criticise and the right to wield consequences.
Freedom of speech is by definition not free if the consequence is the speaker loses their life, or their freedom, or their job.
Nor is it free speech if only some may speak.
By all means criticise Israel Folau for his views. They are old views, views shared by millions, perhaps billions, around the world and many in Australia, but as so wonderfully demonstrated last year they are not the majority view here.
It can not, must not, matter whether those views are the voice of many or the voice of one.
When our society devolves to such that we imprison others for their beliefs or take their livelihoods for their views, it is no longer society but tyranny.
By sacking Israel Folau, Rugby Australia showed what true leadership looks like