Sounds like you'll be happy to take the ISIS schoolgirl in then? I mean, she's only been being guided by her religious convictions after all. Her husbands possible crimes are not hers. Free country and all that.

When you're a member of a team, and represent your nation, I think it's preferable to act like you do. It's a privilege to be in a position where you are idolised for your abilities, and it's a shame for it to be used to push hatred and hell at people. Saying 'it's my religious belief' isn't a magic umbrella that removed responsibility for how you treat others. It's bad publicly. If you sully something that you are supposed to represent, if may impact how your contribution is received. He'd already had a warning and can't follow rules. I wouldn't have sacked him though. Instead I'd have asked the team if his self indulgent distractions were impacting the team dynamic and were an unhelpful distraction, and then base the decision on that.

As far as I'm aware - Islam espouses hatred towards homosexuals all of the time. It is part of their religion. They also don't like alcohol or pork just to let you know. As far as I know, Muslims are free to air these views.
You certainly have something on the representation side and on the effects on team-mates. That is why it would be best to not make these views public - in my opinion.
However, perhaps they should be allowed these views and why should their religious beliefs affect their job? That is the debate really. Not sure which side you are coming down on. Sounds like you want to sack all people with religious beliefs that don't suit your agenda.
I love the line that I must take Shamima Begum in, simply because I have stated people should be freely allowed to express views.
Nowhere did I say I agreed with the views. I just believe that Vunipola and Folau can think what they like - without getting the sack for it.

Red and Blue Army!

I'm sorry but comparing the expression of religious beliefs about what would happen to people in the imaginary hereafter with the realities of someone who joins an actual group dedicated to actually throwing homosexuals off of roof tops and anyone else who gets in their way is sheer hyperbole.

If somebody doesn't like homosexuality it is a disgrace that they get their living taken away. Thoughts are not action.

I don't like gay activists, there was a time when it was a noble thing but now in fact I think they are among the biggest pain in the arses around. I think the correctness of making homosexuality legal where it isn't greeted with state interference or punishment has slowly turned into the absurd situation where any expression of not supporting it is greeted with punishment.

Clown world.

Edited by Stirlingsays (17 Apr 2019 6.40pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

She went to live with someone with extreme views, who may have taken things further. My point, in a absolutist freedom of speech point of view is that I have no reason to believe she's actually done anything harmful other than holding abhorrent and extreme religous views and that when I said that I didn't want her let back into the country, I factored that in and still came to the same decision.

Gay activists didn't make this decision. Ordinary people by and large don't agree with extreme statements like these. I don't care if anyone supports homosexuality or not. Repeatedly publicly proclaiming that people are going to hell despite being warned goes beyond an act of non support, and is certainly not helpful to anyone.

In addition to previously saying that you have gay family members, you've also rattled on repeatedly about how homosexuality is a 'lifestyle you don't like'. If someone can't even be bothered to empathise with and support the challenges of those within their own family, It's hardly rocket science to see how they're going to perceive issues like this.

I don't agree with the comments made by Folau but neither do I like the "group think" mentality that has sprung up.

If we represent our country do we all have to think the same now? So what happening to embracing diversity or does that only count if it's the right type of diversity.

If he had made these comments about a fellow player I can understand sacking him as it is personal and insulting. I would have preferred it if the Aussie RFU had made it clear that these were his views not theirs and left it at that.

Oh well 4 legs good...

One more point

It almost seems that we are trying to promote freedom by restricting freedom. A strange conundrum. As you say - just stick to the narrative you are supposed to have - or else.

Red and Blue Army!