Offence trolling

The evil and cruel Israel Folau has been up to his old tricks of being mean to people again, like the awful Christian he is:


Where and when was this “attack“?

Israel Folau has launched another attack on gay people and also criticised young people being allowed to change gender during a sermon at his Sydney church.

Right, so if you didn’t go to his church on that particular Sunday for that particular service, you wouldn’t have heard this recent “attack” then?

It’s so good of the media to give this egregious behaviour the wider publicity it deserves and otherwise wouldn’t have received. I’m sure gay and transgender people are extremely grateful for being offered this service.

What did the hateful Folau preach to his sheep this time?

The former rugby union star described homosexuality as a sin and claimed the devil was behind primary school children being allowed to decide if they wanted to change gender.

Ok, so in line with the teachings of Christianity, Islam and Judaism then, or, in other words, what about two thirds of the world’s population believes?

Not exactly flat earth dogma, is it?

The statements that homosexuality is a sin and the devil is behind primary school age children “transitioning” genders are presented as being equivalent in their logic and level of outrage.

Perhaps we might not agree Lucifer’s hand is to be found behind “Mermaids“, but it doesn’t mean encouraging the proliferation of transgender children is biologically or morally correct either.

Here’s a fun thought experiment;

You’ve got tickets to see the last ever Rolling Stones’ concert and your babysitter just cancelled. It’s too late to ask any friends or family but both sets of neighbours have said they would help out. Do you ask the Folaus or the Salkilds?

By the way, a quick stalk through Emma’s social media suggests she’s pulled back a little on the “my son is a girl” bullshit and, in fact seems to have completely ceased from boasting mentioning it. Almost as if, I dunno, it was a phase she projected on the poor fucker. One assumes the lad and his dad are somewhat relieved no genitals were mutilated in the meanwhile.

Bills Opinion

It’s obvious that Israel Folau has been found guilty of wrongthink and, from now on, will be subject to this type of offence trolling.

Literally nobody would have known about the content of his sermon last weekend if the media hadn’t sought it out and presented it to the world. I’ve not been to Folau’s church but I suspect it doesn’t meet in a football stadium.

If a gay or transgender person is feeling any negative emotions today as a result of reading the reporting of his sermon, who is to blame?

Folau is being consistent to his beliefs. These beliefs are shared by billions of other people. If you agree he should be hounded out of his employment and to continue to be subject to scrutiny over the details of his religion, perhaps you should also consider where this leads and who the spotlight shines on next.

(We tried to contact Peter Fitzsimons for comment but he was unavailable)

18 Replies to “Offence trolling”

  1. Good on him for sticking to his guns and yes the Lord does giveth and taketh away and Folau certainly knows it and conducts himself in that manner. Principled he is, a rare characteristic in this day and age. So I guess that both parties lawyers will be happy with this latest fire and brimstone “admission” by Folau, although strictly speaking his brief should have been to keep his goddamn head out of the Colosseum for now. Sure, legally this is an act subsequent, Folau comes across as a genuine Polynesian martyr but I cant help but think that some of his missionary team may be getting mileage out of this situation at his expense.

    No prizes for guessing what the commissioners private view on a settlement being reached between the parties is now, plus I cant see a snowflakes chance in hell of them agreeing to arbitration either. RA is probably better off offering their maximum payout now and putting it behind them. They can make it a Calberbank Offer as well, but no doubt their legal team will not be recommending that and I doubt that Folau would be scared off by precedents from a pommy divorce either.

    If it goes legal and if he wins, the judge will have to calculate the damages amount and identify what if any mitigation Folau has taken in the situation to reduce the overall amount of damages suffered. If I were on the opposing side and I lost then I would now argue that he was unemployable as a rugby professional, ie zero damages, I dont fancy his chances at loss of sponsorship either, especially given that RA had some sponsors pull out before his termination as an indication of market sentiment and consequential loss in industrial action has never been awarded in Australia to the best of my knowledge.

    Which club anywhere in the world will take him on now is the question, how much will they pay him, and then that gets deducted from his damages. He is illegible for the Barbarians.

    1. You seem far more excited about the winner/loser/lawyer dynamic than I.

      I’m more concerned about how a minority view is accepted as overruling a majority view by the media and those in charge of important major institutions….erm, and the ARU

      1. That may well be the case, but that’s the only way this will be resolved here as the good guy has claimed an amount of money for their penance. The pink lobby and the pink dollar got the upper hand a very long time ago, I am just commenting on this situation from the current position that our society is in and how it is likely to play out.

        What we have here is a situation where his personal views are causing his employer some demonstrable harm, so I get it that they dont want him around anymore, that’s quite understandable. All I am saying is that they should just give him a few bob in consideration for leaving now and he can continue to preach and go and work for someone else, he is saying the same thing but I am guessing that the quantum is a lot less than he is prepared to accept

        I had to take down a video from my firms Youtube channel because one of our Arabic staff members considered it offensive, I didn’t see a problem with it all, other than he didn’t like it, but I still took it down in the end.

        1. “What we have here is a situation where his personal views are causing his employer some demonstrable harm”.

          Go on then, demonstrate the “harm”.

          1. I reckon a good barrister could make a case that the ARU were unlikely to continue ploughing the Qantas/BMW furrow for very long after November’s World Cup final….

  2. I think you both got there. This is no longer sport?

    It is an advertising medium with an approved type of hyper trained ‘role model’ (sorry, athlete) providing advertiser approved entertainment to an approved and increasingly policed audience. Possibly (and probably) in exchange for their blindness to the changes in their approved thoughts and activities. Working great so far.

    It is like reverse Running Man. The audience doesn’t demand the entertainments they want, they receive the entertainment they need.

    Although the recently sighted AFL ‘Behavioural Awareness Officers’ might have their hands full at a Collingwood or Port Adelaide game on prison day release weekends.

    1. It’s more than a little Soviet in its application too, isn’t it? By which I mean “no man is bigger than the party”.
      Sure, Izzy night be the most exciting player they have and he brings in the (dwindling) crowds but, as he has the wrong opinions he will still be sent to the gulag.
      Emanuel Goldstien.

      1. Cant agree with that assessment, its a straight forward conflict of issue between his employers objectives and his outspoken religious views. No one is telling him to desist with his religion. His employer is saying to him that if you want to continue receiving money from us, then you need to keep a lower profile with your religious views, you are out there in the public domain as an ambassador for us and your religious views are generating complaints, threatening our commercial viability and its just not something that we are prepared to or need to continue with, so its up to you whether you stay out of the spotlight with your views and keep taking the money from us.

        Folau at one stage was saying that he was prepared to walk away, which was the higher moral ground, now he wants the mullah, he lost the moral high ground the moment he decided to play Satan at his own game. He would have looked far better if he had simply walked away, continued preaching and played for Tonga. This is where I think he is being ill advised by those with a bigger agenda than him.

        1. “Its a straight forward conflict of issue between his employers objectives and his outspoken religious views”.

          Not really. It’s a conflict of interest between his religious views and a new political direction his employers have taken very recently.

          His views have remained in line with perhaps two thirds of the population of the world. The ARU’s position on LBGTQI matters isn’t (particularly the TQ and I) and have only recently changed or been made public.

          It could be argued the ARU is the party who made the change resulting in conflict.

  3. Perhaps a useful experiment here would for a Muslim player to tweet out a few choice instructions from the Koran, and see what happens next?

    Might be quite instructive.

    1. I’m not sure that’s how it works, unfortunately. There would need to be a critical mass of such players before one would show their hand on the outlier.

      That seems to have been the model elsewhere in, say the UK, with such beliefs held by politicians and activists in other walks of life.

  4. Huh? Israel Folau’s sermon in a church was reported… as front page news?

    Wow.. just wow…. What a precedent!

    I’ll have to start buying newspapers – coz the reporting of what gets said in some mosques is going to make for some pretty hot front pages of a Monday morning.

  5. Folau says that he has already spent $100k of his own money in this his stoush with RA and now God has told him to start a Gofundme page in an effort to get your money for him to use in hiod foreshadowed legal action in all the way up to the High Court if necessary.

    I thought that God might have at least told him to wait off until after he turned the other cheek with the mandatory conciliation meeting with RA next week.

    He has obviously had a Road to Damascus moment since his initial position of just walking away, to now hyping up the fight in the coliseum, even though it doesn’t need to go that way nor should he say that it is without first listening to what the peacemakers have to say.

    If you agree that he shouldn’t turn the other cheek, or genuinely seek out an early resolution and continue to throw rocks at the Romans or that he should not need to fund his legal foreshadowed battle with his own funds, then you can pay for them on his behalf by donating as shown below.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *