Non Footy Chat Thread II

[Joshuatheeel]

They make wine. And grappa. And ouzo. And raki. And vermouth. And vodka.

So much versatility!

And brandy......and port......and sherry.....

 

[Bazal]

And brandy......and port......and sherry.....

Technically you could argue that all three kind of fall under the umbrella of wine tbh.

But yes. Yay grapes!

 

[Poupou Escobar]

ScoMo plans to introduce religious freedoms legislation which will protect churches and their brethren expressing their views. Be careful what you wish for as there are other religions who feel that they have been been muzzled as well. The fringe right are (without any knowledge of the settlement) are claiming a victory for free speech and religious freedoms. I hope those same merkins have the same approach when the infidels cop it deluxe.

The danger of fundamentalists is in what they do, not what they say.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

My knee hurts.

 

[Gronk]

The danger of fundamentalists is in what they do, not what they say.

All good. I'm guessing that if Zaky Mallah goes on Q&A again saying that the Jihad is fine, that the merkins celebrating Izzy's "win" today will simply nod in agreement that Zaky has the right to religious freedom ?

 

[Gary Gutful]

Yeah but you're one of those bananas every merkin has in their freezer from 1997 that are all black and shriveled

Once you've had black...

 

[Twizzle]

ScoMo plans to introduce religious freedoms legislation which will protect churches and their brethren expressing their views. Be careful what you wish for as there are other religions who feel that they have been been muzzled as well. The fringe right are (without any knowledge of the settlement) are claiming a victory for free speech and religious freedoms. I hope those same merkins have the same approach when the infidels cop it deluxe.

In his speech where he said he had been vindicated by the settlement, he had a dig at the religious free speech laws and asked the pollies to change them. The problem for me is that he can get away with his brand of hate speech under the guise of religious free speech yet any one else would be accused of bigotry and/or homophobia

 

[Bazal]

Once you've had black...

You go deaf

 

[Gary Gutful]

The danger of fundamentalists is in what they do, not what they say.

Not sure about that. You don't think that people can be inspired to do evil things based on encouragement from others?

I'm not against free speech btw, but it's been proven on countless occasions that there are enough idiots in the world that can be easily swayed.

 

[Gary Gutful]

My knee hurts.

What did you do to it?

 

[Bazal]

What did you do to it?

Hurt it, I guess

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

What did you do to it?

Nothing. It's a mystery ailment. Stupid ageing.

 

[Bazal]

Not sure about that. You don't think that people can be inspired to do evil things based on encouragement from others?

I'm not against free speech btw, but it's been proven on countless occasions that there are enough idiots in the world that can be easily swayed.

Absolutely

If no one was swayed by fundamentalist talk, all the fundamentalists would be dead

 

[Gary Gutful]

For example if I started talking to enough people about how bald coaches should be banned then someone would probably rough up BA while no-one was looking.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Nothing. It's a mystery ailment. Stupid ageing.

Have you tried turning it off and on again?

 

[Gronk]

In his speech where he said he had been vindicated by the settlement, he had a dig at the religious free speech laws and asked the pollies to change them. The problem for me is that he can get away with his brand of hate speech under the guise of religious free speech yet any one else would be accused of bigotry and/or homophobia

See this is where I think that whole Izzy thing has been twisted. He is entitled to say whatever he likes in private or as a citizen on social media. However his employer, who pays him handsomely, requested that he refrain from making such public divisive statements as it damaged their brand and the brand of their sponsors. They were apparently wrong is seeking that.

So as it stands your employee can chant from the rooftops anything they like and you have to cop it ?

Meanwhile, church schools want the right to terminate anyone who are not in line with their teachings ?

Am I missing something here ?

 

[Bazal]

For example if I started talking to enough people about how bald coaches should be banned then someone would probably rough up BA while no-one was looking.

Someone keep an eye on @hineyrulz FFS!

 

[Noise]

Meanwhile, church schools want the right to terminate anyone who are no in line with their teachings ?

Am I missing something here ?

That's not true at all. Catholic schools aren't trying to terminate any teacher that has had a divorce or is living with their partner unmarried.

 

[Bazal]

Have you tried turning it off and on again?

Is it plugged in?

 

[Gronk]

That's not true at all. Catholic schools aren't trying to terminate any teacher that has had a divorce or is living with their partner unmarried.

Well no. On one hand they are saying that they are not seeking to sack anyone, yet simultaneously are campaigning for the introduction of a Religious Discrimination Act.

Explanation:

A number of federal laws prohibit different types of discrimination: the Racial Discrimination Act, the Sex Discrimination Act (which covers sex, gender identity, marital status, sexuality and family responsibilities), the Age Discrimination Act and the Disability Discrimination Act. The idea is to add a Religious Discrimination Act to this collection of laws.

The basic function of these laws is to prohibit discrimination on the basis of a protected attribute in various contexts such as employment and the provision of goods and services.

A Religious Discrimination Act following the same basic model would prohibit things like refusing to hire a person because she is a Catholic and sacking a person because he is an atheist. It would also prohibit a café refusing to sell coffee to a customer because she is a Muslim and a bakery refusing to make a cake for a customer because he is an Anglican.

https://www.monash.edu/law/news-and...-does-not-need-a-religious-discrimination-act