Shameful lack of tradition

[Red Pill]

If I'm employed to wear a jersey with advertisements and messages on them (and I'm talking paid way more than you and I), they could draw dicks with bright purple testicles on them if I'm asked to, for all I care. Doesn't mean I want dicks with purple testicles myself.

And people tell ME to toughen up!

Your right mate. Here is a pic of the ST George regular week jersey for 2035 and no complaints yet.

 

[Terry Zarsoff]

Strange day for the club huh. 7 players stand down opposing equality jersey on religious grounds while another is in court for church stabbing.

Meanwhile, across town…

 

[Bearfax]

Not even close to the being same, but nice try haha.

On the contrary it is precisely the same issue. I suspect you're allowing the emotive aspects of the sex related elements of LGBTQ to see this differently. We cant discriminate against people in acting against them, but we cant be denied our right to hold an opinion or belief.

See it this way. I employ a a child care person, and in a manner almost have them as part of the family. They do their job well and I pay them as an employee. As I suggested a situation arises and I need the child care worker to join a family function and I offer only a meal that is not Kosher or Halal depending upon whether the person is a committed Judaism or Muslim. Their personal faith does not effect their role and I have accepted them in my employ knowing their faith is important to them. That person is not denying your right to eat non Kosher or Halal meals but its understood the cant eat it.

You've made a meal though that places them in a position of acting against their faith. What a person chooses in their personal life is their business not the clubs, not an employer, if that position is known. Fundamentally it is asking a person to betray their beliefs. Canterbury understood this with Hopoate when he said he couldn't play on Sundays. They agreed to the contract, knowing his position. Whether we think its all rubbish or not, it is important to them. Otherwise 7 Pac Islanders would not be making the stand. To dismiss it, is to show disrespect for their faith. They are not opposing the clubs right to have the Guernsey used by other players, they are merely stating that based on their beliefs they cant wear that item

 

[rj90]

On the contrary it is precisely the same issue. I suspect you're allowing the emotive aspects of the sex related elements of LGBTQ to see this differently. We cant discriminate against people in acting against them, but we cant be denied our right to hold an opinion or belief.

See it this way. I employ a a child care person, and in a manner almost have them as part of the family. They do their job well and I pay them as an employee. As I suggested a situation arises and I need the child care worker to join a family function and I offer only a meal that is not Kosher or Halal depending upon whether the person is a committed Judaism or Muslim. Their personal faith does not effect their role and I have accepted them in my employ knowing their faith is important to them. That person is not denying your right to eat non Kosher or Halal meals but its understood the cant eat it.

You've made a meal though that places them in a position of acting against their faith. What a person chooses in their personal life is their business not the clubs, not an employer, if that position is known. Fundamentally it is asking a person to betray their beliefs. Canterbury understood this with Hopoate when he said he couldn't play on Sundays. They agreed to the contract, knowing his position. Whether we think its all rubbish or not, it is important to them. Otherwise 7 Pac Islanders would not be making the stand. To dismiss it, is to show disrespect for their faith. They are not opposing the clubs right to have the Guernsey used by other players, they are merely stating that based on their beliefs they cant wear that item

I appreciate your response, but stand by my original comment. These two issues are not even close to being similar.

 

[Ryan]

So you would refuse because its illegal aka not allowed within Australian laws? How is that any different to a religious person refusing because its not allowed within the laws of their religion?
(Also, I dont think its explicity illegal in all workplaces)

You're being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. Rugby league jerseys, Shorts, Boots are designed for performance during a game. But also to advertise and market to raise revenue on behalf of the club, so these players can continue to get paid.

If your religion says it's morally ethical to play with spousal abusers, attempted murderers, physical assault people, drug abusers, gang members, privacy breachers of young women, yet excludes wearing rainbow colours on jerseys, says more about them (and you).

Get real.

Players, get off your high horse, grow up, as James Graham said, is THIS the mountain you're going to climb (you've had many other more proactive reasons I've listed right here to morally stand down in support of your religion in the past) and do your ****ing job !

 

[bigswifty]

But this is getting ridiculous. A community jersey, retro jersey, crazy socks, now a pride jersey .. can we just wear the traditional Manly jersey for while please.

Why can't we celebrate/promote these events in other ways that don't involve wearing a monstrosity of a jersey (that's you, awful blue community jersey).

Well the problem with traditional jerseys is that once everyone has one, then it turns from a revenue stream into a revenue slow drip.

 

[Ryan]

Well the problem with traditional jerseys is that once everyone has one, then it turns from a revenue stream into a revenue slow drip.

You're not considering the real revenue driver behind. The sponsors who advertise on the jerseys for marketing benefit for themselves continue to pay the same amount over a number of X years.

Merchandise sales account for a very little of the overall revenue takings of a club.

Sponsorship / marketing on the other hand....

 

[Bearfax]

I appreciate your response, but stand by my original comment. These two issues are not even close to being similar.

My friend its important to see issues through the eyes of others as best you can, not just your own.They have a point of view based on a lifetime of experiences. as well. You have the right to believe what you believe about this issue, and I probably dont believe elements of what you believe much differently. But if I am allowed that right, so are they. You have a right to believe what you choose to believe and live your life based on that belief. No different. I have friends who are anti-vaxers, Creationists, pro-Putinists, anti climate change believers, conspiracy enthusiasts, red necks some with racists attitudes. Most are intelligent and generally reasonable people. I dont believe what they believe but they have a right to believe what they choose to believe. I have no right to force them into a situation that betrays that belief to them unless they cause harm to others. What you believe and how you live your personal life, is your business, not a Big Brother's. Read 1984, which addresses this issue very well.

 

[rj90]

My friend its important to see issues through the eyes of others as best you can, not just your own.They have a point of view based on a lifetime of experiences. as well. You have the right to believe what you believe about this issue, and I probably dont believe elements of what you believe much differently. But if I am allowed that right, so are they. You have a right to believe what you choose to believe and live your life based on that belief. No different. I have friends who are anti-vaxers, Creationists, pro-Putinists, anti climate change believers, conspiracy enthusiasts, red necks some with racists attitudes. Most are intelligent and generally reasonable people. I dont believe what they believe but they have a right to believe what they choose to believe. I have no right to force them into a situation that betrays that belief to them unless they cause harm to others. What you believe and how you live your personal life, is your business, not a Big Brother's. Read 1984, which addresses this issue very well.

With the greatest respect, I did attempt to see through your eyes, and I still disagree with your stance that the two issues are similar in nature.

In relation to the stance of the players, I have stated many times here that I can appreciate their choice. I don't agree with it, but I can understand why they did it.

I think you may have confused the two issues.

 

[TokyoEagle]

....still, we have to pander to the minority for the small % of that minority who kick up a stink when an owl looks at them ever so slightly the wrong way.

The owl is likely just weighing up the percentages of a successful hunt and looking at you for your nutritional value

 

[Ron E. Gibbs]

You've made a meal though that places them in a position of acting against their faith. What a person chooses in their personal life is their business not the clubs, not an employer, if that position is known. Fundamentally it is asking a person to betray their beliefs. Canterbury understood this with Hopoate when he said he couldn't play on Sundays. They agreed to the contract, knowing his position. Whether we think its all rubbish or not, it is important to them. Otherwise 7 Pac Islanders would not be making the stand. To dismiss it, is to show disrespect for their faith. They are not opposing the clubs right to have the Guernsey used by other players, they are merely stating that based on their beliefs they cant wear that item

I have always admired Will Hopoate, just as I have always respected the many Polynesian players who have put their footy careers to one side in order to undertake service as a Mormon missionary. That's genuine commitment to one's religion and beliefs.

But if religious beliefs are so important to our players - to the extent that they trump their professional and inter-personal obligations, and any form of compromise is therefore out of the question - then they should find other jobs. They are footy players, and footy players are required to wear jerseys. Those jerseys represent their clubs and, for better or worse, the club's sponsors. Sometimes they also represent charitable or social causes that the club, or the NRL as a whole, stands behind.

Up until this week, nobody ever thought that what was on a jersey represented the player wearing it as an individual. As I said, it represents the club. So no one ever thought, "Pointsbet! Josh Aloiai is an ambassador for Pointsbet! He fully endorses and approves of Pointsbet and all their activities!" If anyone thought anything about it at all, it would be something along the lines of, "Oh, Manly is sponsored by a betting agency". But throw a rainbow-coloured stripe on there, and suddenly the jersey becomes a symbol of individual freedom and expression to the point where we are supposed to be applauding players for their bravery in choosing not to wear it.

If you take religion out of it, take Polynesian culture out of it, take away all the words in all the opinion columns and all the forum posts here and elsewhere, it comes down to this: They don't want to wear the jersey because they don't believe that gay people should be included in rugby league or the wider community. No one is "brave" enough to say it out loud, but behind all the posturing ("God doesn't like gay people - and I'm just following the big guy's lead here"), that's the message: Gays are bad, and gays are not welcome. So if you're standing up for their right to express their opinions and beliefs, that's the opinion and/or belief they are expressing.

And yes, they have a right to express that belief and opinion. But don't dance around it, as if the right to express an opinion is the be-all and end-all of the discussion. Don't cloak it as a "religious belief" or a "cultural belief"; tell me exactly what that belief is and have the courage to stand by it. And accept the consequences that come with it.

The Australian community is of course made up of groups from many different backgrounds, with different cultural and religious backgrounds, but we also have a set of shared values and expectations. And while we all have the right to express our opinions and beliefs, that doesn't mean all of those beliefs and opinions are of equal weight, nor should they be. Some opinions and beliefs are just plain wrong. The Earth is not flat. The world is not run by a shadowy cabal of space aliens. The Parramatta Eels are not a good rugby league team. And gay people are not evil, or less worthy, or different to anybody else.

 

[The Who]

If I'm employed to wear a jersey with advertisements and messages on them (and I'm talking paid way more than you and I), they could draw dicks with bright purple testicles on them if I'm asked to, for all I care. Doesn't mean I want dicks with purple testicles myself.

And people tell ME to toughen up!

C'mon Ryan. Your many posts suggest you are a man of principle. Now you say you'd do anything for money.
I'm disappointed. Your views often used to resonate with me.

 

[robbiea]

They sign up to play football, that is what they should be doing.
Just more millennial cry babies.

 

[The Who]

They sign up to play football, that is what they should be doing.
Just more millennial cry babies.

That was the excuse the Nazis used at the Nuremberg War Trials. "We signed up to join the military and were just following orders...."

 

[HK_Eagle]

My friend its important to see issues through the eyes of others as best you can, not just your own.They have a point of view based on a lifetime of experiences. as well. You have the right to believe what you believe about this issue, and I probably dont believe elements of what you believe much differently. But if I am allowed that right, so are they. You have a right to believe what you choose to believe and live your life based on that belief. No different. I have friends who are anti-vaxers, Creationists, pro-Putinists, anti climate change believers, conspiracy enthusiasts, red necks some with racists attitudes. Most are intelligent and generally reasonable people. I dont believe what they believe but they have a right to believe what they choose to believe. I have no right to force them into a situation that betrays that belief to them unless they cause harm to others. What you believe and how you live your personal life, is your business, not a Big Brother's. Read 1984, which addresses this issue very well.

That’s critical. And this is the issue of visibility I keep raising. LGBTIQ has no visibility in our league community and that’s why comments like this happen. Those 7 players’ belief around homosexuality and the hurt, pain and suppression it does to the LGBTIQ community goes unrecognised, unacknowledged and unseen.

 

[Pete W]

I have always admired Will Hopoate, just as I have always respected the many Polynesian players who have put their footy careers to one side in order to undertake service as a Mormon missionary. That's genuine commitment to one's religion and beliefs.

But if religious beliefs are so important to our players - to the extent that they trump their professional and inter-personal obligations, and any form of compromise is therefore out of the question - then they should find other jobs. They are footy players, and footy players are required to wear jerseys. Those jerseys represent their clubs and, for better or worse, the club's sponsors. Sometimes they also represent charitable or social causes that the club, or the NRL as a whole, stands behind.

Up until this week, nobody ever thought that what was on a jersey represented the player wearing it as an individual. As I said, it represents the club. So no one ever thought, "Pointsbet! Josh Aloiai is an ambassador for Pointsbet! He fully endorses and approves of Pointsbet and all their activities!" If anyone thought anything about it at all, it would be something along the lines of, "Oh, Manly is sponsored by a betting agency". But throw a rainbow-coloured stripe on there, and suddenly the jersey becomes a symbol of individual freedom and expression to the point where we are supposed to be applauding players for their bravery in choosing not to wear it.

If you take religion out of it, take Polynesian culture out of it, take away all the words in all the opinion columns and all the forum posts here and elsewhere, it comes down to this: They don't want to wear the jersey because they don't believe that gay people should be included in rugby league or the wider community. No one is "brave" enough to say it out loud, but behind all the posturing ("God doesn't like gay people - and I'm just following the big guy's lead here"), that's the message: Gays are bad, and gays are not welcome. So if you're standing up for their right to express their opinions and beliefs, that's the opinion and/or belief they are expressing.

And yes, they have a right to express that belief and opinion. But don't dance around it, as if the right to express an opinion is the be-all and end-all of the discussion. Don't cloak it as a "religious belief" or a "cultural belief"; tell me exactly what that belief is and have the courage to stand by it. And accept the consequences that come with it.

The Australian community is of course made up of groups from many different backgrounds, with different cultural and religious backgrounds, but we also have a set of shared values and expectations. And while we all have the right to express our opinions and beliefs, that doesn't mean all of those beliefs and opinions are of equal weight, nor should they be. Some opinions and beliefs are just plain wrong. The Earth is not flat. The world is not run by a shadowy cabal of space aliens. The Parramatta Eels are not a good rugby league team. And gay people are not evil, or less worthy, or different to anybody else.

Agreed.... except the part about the space aliens

 

[Ryan]

C'mon Ryan. Your many posts suggest you are a man of principle. Now you say you'd do anything for money.
I'm disappointed. Your views often used to resonate with me.

Principle? You know the topic people are debating here? The advertising isn't relating to anything illegal, and the wearers of the jerseys are individuals, who may or may not agree with what's written on them (gambling, drinking, types of butchery, swearing etc - are all aspects various religious views don't accept). Why is THIS the mountain the one they want to climb?

Live and real example: You realise four X (alcohol / beer) support the maroons & advertise on their jersey? If this is the case, you're suggesting muslims shouldn't wear the jersey, because the quran forbids the consumption of alcohol?

Or is that different in yours, and everyone else's ethical thermometer? Better tell Corey Paterson he's going to hell, for not standing against the jerseys he wears:

Hypocrisy from you and many others? Exactly.

 

[Karshy]

You're being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative. Rugby league jerseys, Shorts, Boots are designed for performance during a game. But also to advertise and market to raise revenue on behalf of the club, so these players can continue to get paid.

If your religion says it's morally ethical to play with spousal abusers, attempted murderers, physical assault people, drug abusers, gang members, privacy breachers of young women, yet excludes wearing rainbow colours on jerseys, says more about them (and you).

Get real.

Players, get off your high horse, grow up, as James Graham said, is THIS the mountain you're going to climb (you've had many other more proactive reasons I've listed right here to morally stand down in support of your religion in the past) and do your ****ing job !

"you are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative" - isnt the whole point of a forum like this to share and argue opinions? I love how you have taken on the strawman strategy.

I imagine there are lots of jerseys out there that are designed to promote causes. I recall there have even been jerseys out there to promote movies! This jersey has been designed to promote the LGBQTIA+ community and while the intention is excellent it could have been handled much more professionally in a way that doesnt exclude another minority group based on their own beliefs. Sometimes in life two causes will clash. Both can still be treated with respect which unfortunately hasn't been done in this situation.

I have even suggested an alternate solution would have been to have a pride day with players whos beliefs aren't compromised opposed to forcing players to wear a jersey and promote something they consider inappropriate for their religion. Just so you know its illegal for an employer to discriminate on the basis of sexuality and/or religion. This situation could have and should have been avoided entirely.

 

[Ryan]

"you are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative" - isnt the whole point of a forum like this to share and argue opinions? I love how you have taken on the strawman strategy.

I imagine there are lots of jerseys out there that are designed to promote causes. I recall there have even been jerseys out there to promote movies! This jersey has been designed to promote the LGBQTIA+ community and while the intention is excellent it could have been handled much more professionally in a way that doesnt exclude another minority group based on their own beliefs. Sometimes in life two causes will clash. Both can still be treated with respect which unfortunately hasn't been done in this situation.

I have even suggested an alternate solution would have been to have a pride day with players whos beliefs aren't compromised opposed to forcing players to wear a jersey and promote something they consider inappropriate for their religion. Just so you know its illegal for an employer to discriminate on the basis of sexuality and/or religion. This situation could have and should have been avoided entirely.

Don't have a "pride day". Have an "inclusion day" - and just hope to hell the colours are of the right shade for the princesses who wear our jerseys.

It's argumentative to suggest a clear see through G-banger is the same as a jersey with a pride rainbow on it.

 

[rj90]

"you are being argumentative for the sake of being argumentative" - isnt the whole point of a forum like this to share and argue opinions? I love how you have taken on the strawman strategy.

I imagine there are lots of jerseys out there that are designed to promote causes. I recall there have even been jerseys out there to promote movies! This jersey has been designed to promote the LGBQTIA+ community and while the intention is excellent it could have been handled much more professionally in a way that doesnt exclude another minority group based on their own beliefs. Sometimes in life two causes will clash. Both can still be treated with respect which unfortunately hasn't been done in this situation.

I have even suggested an alternate solution would have been to have a pride day with players whos beliefs aren't compromised opposed to forcing players to wear a jersey and promote something they consider inappropriate for their religion. Just so you know its illegal for an employer to discriminate on the basis of sexuality and/or religion. This situation could have and should have been avoided entirely.

Look what happens when you cut the bullsh!t name calling - you actually raise some very valid points that can be taken seriously. Maybe it's only the 360 boys that are flogs after all.. ?