Vacuous inclusivity campaign

[sa1nt5]

Based on what, your experience of court/law processes, or just uninformed opinion?

RA reasons for termination of contract were there for everyone to see, breach of contractual conditions, after previous warnings to which he agreed not to further breach. No one won both parties came to an agreement after lengthy mediation.

Using your rationale, why did Israel reach a confidential settlement?

Israel knew he got it wrong and it was he who were in breach, so both parties agreed on an Israel Folau & RA apology and settled. If your going to try and take a stand on a particular issue, at least be informed. As you advised grouch, think harder.

I have SFA to offer this discussion from here on.

Israel didn’t reach a confidential settlement is was offered as a way out for RA. You have no logic. Israel took them to court as he knew no breach occurred as reported. RA had no grounds to a protracted case as the cost of admitting what they had done far exceeded any considered settlement. In my world no one admits guilt and pays out millions if they are innocent. Facts are facts and Israel brought them. Your post contradicts itself and common sense.

 

[muzby]

This is kindergarten simplistic and borderline histrionics for the sake of brevity.

Karl Popper, Kindergarten teacher.

I must have missed that on his resume..

 

[41yearsaint]

Obviously not RA confidentially settled rather than have the truth come out

Beggers belief that people can think RA terminated his contract legally.

 

[sa1nt5]

Karl Popper was an Austrian who fled because of Nazism. Hardly simplistic.

Hate speech can kill.

https://www.blackdoginstitute.org.au/about-us/news-and-media/mindthefacts

LGBTI young people are twice as likely to be diagnosed with a mental health condition, six times more likely to have suicidal thoughts and five times more likely to make an attempt on their life than their heterosexual peers


And you're a gimp.

You’re a loud mouth with no courage and little brains. You’re last comment affirms you don’t practice what you preach. Twice now you have been reduced to ad hominem attacks

 

[grouch]

You’re a loud mouth with no courage and little brains. You’re last comment affirms you don’t practice what you preach. Twice now you have been reduced to ad hominem attacks

*your

 

[sa1nt5]

Karl Popper, Kindergarten teacher.

I must have missed that on his resume..

You probably missed also that in 28th March 1939 Judah declared war on Germany. Not condoning the result of the declaration, just saying much is missed that matters

 

[Old Timer]

In principle I agree. However you quote newspapers as the true course of events, the court doesn’t, and RA know this they also knew they got it wrong and it was they who were in breach, so they agreed on an RA apology and settled

It is not unusual for contracts to be paid out in full despite the tenure being cut short.
Most organisations and individuals make "commercial decisions" to save long drawn out expensive legal battles especially without knowing how costs may be awarded even if you do win.
A day at court is a very costly exercise indeed and judges often insist that both sides mediate "in good faith" so as to not clog up the courts for days and weeks on end and will often be harsh in their rulings if they perceive that a party was not "negotiating in good faith" so nothing new or extraordinary in the way it all played out.
Both sides made apologies but it should be noted that RA didn't actually apologies for terminating him so your notion that they erred is not based in fact.
Folau's statement that he was vindicated is also not based in fact as the termination stands and the code has him excommunicated so if that is vindication then FMD he is even dopier than I think he is.
His vindication is that he was allowed to say what he likes which in fact was never in question and the only thing that was in question was his employment status and as he is no longer employed by RA I think the facts speak for themselves.

 

[sa1nt5]

*your

You’re is short for you are. Your suggests it is yours. Thanks for public confirmation of my assumption

 

[muzby]

You’re a loud mouth with no courage and little brains. You’re last comment affirms you don’t practice what you preach. Twice now you have been reduced to ad hominem attacks

At the risk of disobeying my mantra of not arguing with idiots, grouch is calling you a gimp because of your opinion, which is something that is a) your choice and b) can’t be changed. Israel is telling people they’re going to hell based on their sexuality, which is a) not their choice and b) can’t be changed.

One person calling you a gimp is highly unlikely to make you want to go and kill yourself.

The same can’t be said for a young gay person struggling with their identity, only to be told by a public figure that they belong in Hell.

 

[sa1nt5]

It is not unusual for contracts to be paid out in full despite the tenure being cut short.
Most organisations and individuals make "commercial decisions" to save long drawn out expensive legal battles especially without knowing how costs may be awarded even if you do win.
A day at court is a very costly exercise indeed and judges often insist that both sides mediate "in good faith" so as to not clog up the courts for days and weeks on end and will often be harsh in their rulings if they perceive that a party was not "negotiating in good faith" so nothing new or extraordinary in the way it all played out.
Both sides made apologies but it should be noted that RA didn't actually apologies for terminating him so your notion that they erred is not based in fact.
Folau's statement that he was vindicated is also not based in fact as the termination stands and the code has him excommunicated so if that is vindication then FMD he is even dopier than I think he is.
His vindication is that he was allowed to say what he likes which in fact was never in question and the only thing that was in question was his employment status and as he is no longer employed by RA I think the facts speak for themselves.

Touchè. One would think being a member of the wallabies would be paramount to a union player

 

[grouch]

You’re is short for you are. Your suggests it is yours. Thanks for public confirmation of my assumption

You’re last comment affirms you don’t practice what you preach.

Good one gimp.

 

[muzby]

You’re is short for you are. Your suggests it is yours. Thanks for public confirmation of my assumption

Read his post again & maybe you’ll see which word was highlighted.

 

[grouch]

You probably missed also that in 28th March 1939 Judah declared war on Germany. Not condoning the result of the declaration, just saying much is missed that matters

Yeah this is false also. It was merely an attempt at international boycott in response to Nazi violence. And it happened in 1933.

Gimp.

 

[Mr Angry]

Beggers belief that people can think RA terminated his contract legally.

Have not read his contract , but my employers they could sack me, I agreed, post nothing against company policy.

He has better laywers, than Todd Carney, such a bad photo, worst ever.

Whilst you may not know me, in my field, people do, so I do not facebook Abbott is an idiot, religion has past its used by date.

Not really hard.

Mr Angry, my real name is Brad Pitt-Timberwolf.................

 

[sa1nt5]

At the risk of disobeying my mantra of not arguing with idiots, grouch is calling you a gimp because of your opinion, which is something that is a) your choice and b) can’t be changed. Israel is telling people they’re going to hell based on their sexuality, which is a) not their choice and b) can’t be changed.

One person calling you a gimp is highly unlikely to make you want to go and kill yourself.

The same can’t be said for a young gay person struggling with their identity, only to be told by a public figure that they belong in Hell.

Muzby the consensus is that you are the idiot those young people ought to read a bible sometime, according to them the earth has a few years left. Maybe priorities are not focused where they should be. You essentially say words need circumstances as to wether they are hurtful or not. That’s gibberish

 

[sa1nt5]

Yeah this is false also. It was merely an attempt at international boycott in response to Nazi violence. And it happened in 1933.

Gimp.

Just look that up did you. Read further muppet or get your mum to read it to you.

 

[grouch]

Just look that up did you. Read further muppet or get your mum to read it to you.

I prefer reading books but if you want to lend me your 8chan password I'm happy to have a few laughs at whatever demented nonsense they dream up in there. Is your username still "gimp831926"?

 

[muzby]

Muzby the consensus is that you are the idiot those young people ought to read a bible sometime, according to them the earth has a few years left. Maybe priorities are not focused where they should be. You essentially say words need circumstances as to wether they are hurtful or not. That’s gibberish

I’m sorry but this just doesn’t make sense.

Muzby the consensus is that you are the idiot

You can’t have a consensus of one, sorry.

those young people ought to read a bible sometime

Yes, the story of Sodom & Gomorrah is a right hoot.

according to them the earth has a few years left.

Who’s “them”? Gay kids? People in the bible? Gay kids reading the bible? Prepers Digest?

Who is it that says the earth only has a few years left? (I’d like to know if this is true, far too many things I need to do before then)

Maybe priorities are not focused where they should be.

Who’s priorities? The gay kids reading the bible? The gay kids not reading the bible? The prepers? (I hear Coles have a 3 for $2 on tinned baked beans)

Whose priorities and where should they be?

You essentially say words need circumstances as to wether they are hurtful or not.

Words very much need circumstances (otherwise known as context) to understand the sender, the message and the receiver, and of course the lens through which both the sender and the recipient view the message itself.

Being called a gimp in the context of a bedroom can be a wonderful, leather clad expression of love.

That’s gibberish

Thank you for succinctly summing up your argument in two words.

 

[41yearsaint]

At the risk of disobeying my mantra of not arguing with idiots, grouch is calling you a gimp because of your opinion, which is something that is a) your choice and b) can’t be changed. Israel is telling people they’re going to hell based on their sexuality, which is a) not their choice and b) can’t be changed.

One person calling you a gimp is highly unlikely to make you want to go and kill yourself.

The same can’t be said for a young gay person struggling with their identity, only to be told by a public figure that they belong in Hell.

Well it can, if a gay person is brought up in a loving accepting home, with friends and family that support them. If it wasn't for the media and RA, gay family members of mine would not have even known about it.

 

[muzby]

Well it can, if a gay person is brought up in a loving accepting home, with friends and family that support them. If it wasn't for the media and RA, gay family members of mine would not have even known about it.

So the very first anti-gay message they ever heard was this post from Folau?

This seems highly implausible...