Non Footy Chat Thread II

[Gary Gutful]

So apparently the celebrity chef George Columbaris is being sentenced today after some punk charged him with assault after a push at the A-league GF.

The fan sledged the chef and the chef in turn pushed him. Not sure why provocation was not argued in defence.

Anyway the Gold Douchebag Award for today goes to the fan who thinks that it's Ok to yell out abuse and then run to the police when he gets a shove.

I reckon provocation wasn't argued because he would have lost that argument as well.



I did like his fish zinger. Keep em' coming George.

"As a true supporter what I did was wrong, and I need to pay the price," he said.

"I apologised the day after, I apologise to the gentleman that I approached, I shouldn't have done that.

"I apologise to NSW Police, who I'm sure have bigger fish to fry, pardon the pun."

 

[84 Baby]

The best 45 seconds of my day...... when my wife lets me......

Day? Bloody hell are you a triathlete or marathon runner. I'd have said month

 

[84 Baby]

I reckon provocation wasn't argued because he would have lost that argument as well.



I did like his fish zinger. Keep em' coming George.

"As a true supporter what I did was wrong, and I need to pay the price," he said.

"I apologised the day after, I apologise to the gentleman that I approached, I shouldn't have done that.

"I apologise to NSW Police, who I'm sure have bigger fish to fry, pardon the pun."

I don't get it. Is he saying he's a merman? And there are bigger mermen?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

George 'parra pete' Columbaris

 

[strider]

Pissweak f**kin softcock for pressing charges

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Meh, the names aren't silly enough.

Nobbys Head is alright

 

[Kornstar]

To be honest I haven't looked too much into the Safe Schools stuff yet.

Some of the curriculum guides that we work with border on promoting sexual experimentation but it really comes down to how a teacher presents it. You've actually got a fair bit of freedom but there are many checks along the way so if you were promoting anal sex and dildos you'd probably get caught out.

Not just the way teachers present it but also then parents, family or friends and the way they also explain that it is ok to feel how you feel and not feel ashamed.

My daughter asked last weekend about the marriage equality stuff she is seeing. That of course led to a conversation how sometimes men love men and women love women and that it is ok. Then i found both my wife and i over stating that it is ok. Each time she said yuck or whatever 8 year olds say we would push further that it is totally ok if you want to love another girl and marry a woman when she is older.

You just want to ensure that they will feel comfortable talking to you about it (or anything for that matter) when they are older.

Now, my sisters kids, they are the other end of the scale. The parents are racist homophobes and they talk that way around their kids, i make sure i stay away and keep my daughter from them as much as possible.

I also have friends who are the same.

Those are the kids i feel sorry for and who could be a statistic if they ever had feelings towards the same sex or other orientations.........

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

There was a good program on SBS Viceland last night about France and the banning of the burqa, burkinni and religious headwear in schools.

The French argue that they simply do not want religious statements via clothing. They want their population to be visually French. Nothing else.

Muslim women argue that they are not oppressed and wear their garments by choice.

I concede thst the French were convincing and that their laws did not have racial undertones (unlike the motives of One Nation).

So I am on the fence now. I need to think about it more.

Not meaning to be rude but your opinion is irrelevant. What the French are doing is irrelevant. My opinion is irrelevant.

The Constitution has provisions for religious freedom. How that is to be interpreted is the only thing that counts.

My gut feeling is that, considering the oppressed females have been brainwashed into saying that it is worn by choice, it would not be considered an integral part of the religion and therefore not covered.

Having said that, it has enough of a history that that may end up on top, thus giving the burqa Constitutional coverage and thus making it illegal to ban it.

I'd say this needs to go to the High Court to be reviewed.

 

[Gronk]

Not meaning to be rude but your opinion is irrelevant. What the French are doing is irrelevant. My opinion is irrelevant.

The Constitution has provisions for religious freedom. How that is to be interpreted is the only thing that counts.

My gut feeling is that, considering the oppressed females have been brainwashed into saying that it is worn by choice, it would not be considered an integral part of the religion and therefore not covered.

Having said that, it has enough of a history that that may end up on top, thus giving the burqa Constitutional coverage and thus making it illegal to ban it.

I'd say this needs to go to the High Court to be reviewed.

FYI the French Constitution also has strong religious protections.

However in 2010 they introduced laws which made it "...illegal for anyone to cover their faces in public places like streets, parks, public transport or shops...".

This was tested in their Constitutional Court and was also upheld in the European Court of Human Rights.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

Tom Cruise may be in his seventies and a nutcase in real life but he has some decent movies.

 

[ash411]

Not meaning to be rude but your opinion is irrelevant. What the French are doing is irrelevant. My opinion is irrelevant.

The Constitution has provisions for religious freedom. How that is to be interpreted is the only thing that counts.

My gut feeling is that, considering the oppressed females have been brainwashed into saying that it is worn by choice, it would not be considered an integral part of the religion and therefore not covered.

Having said that, it has enough of a history that that may end up on top, thus giving the burqa Constitutional coverage and thus making it illegal to ban it.

I'd say this needs to go to the High Court to be reviewed.

Yes, because god knows the constitution is a set in stone document that can never, ever be changed.

 

[strider]

Tom Cruise may be in his seventies and a nutcase in real life but he has some decent movies.

Yeah theres been plenty of good tom cruise movies

 

[Gary Gutful]

Tom Cruise may be in his seventies and a nutcase in real life but he has some decent movies.

I thought he was in his eighties?

 

[Bazal]

I thought he was in his eighties?

No that was the last time he made a good movie...

 

[Gary Gutful]

Oh, OK.

...and whats with the whole scientician thing?

 

[Bazal]

Oh, OK.

...and whats with the whole scientician thing?

I think it's a religion that worships money and crappy science fiction novels.

Basically it's Christianity with extra steps.

 

[Gary Gutful]

@I'm a loser baby... has gone quiet. He might be actually watching a movie instead of pretending to like he normally does.

 

[I'm a loser baby...]

*Name added to very special list

 

[Gronk]

 

[Gary Gutful]

What a surprise that our resident snowflake leftoid SJW Auckland Warriors would send a link through to the ABC!

Such a looser!