My opinion is better than yours.

gramar

An Australian rugby player has voiced his personal opinion about same sex marriage. Not sure why you’d bother but he decided in any case to publicly declare, respectfully it has to be said, that he’s not in favour due to his Christian beliefs. One prominent ex rugby player responded with a middle finger emoji while the always shy and retiring Donal Og Cusack, responded with a mature and considered tweet that included the line ‘rugby people shouldn’t be allowed to breed’. If that’s his reaction to one person’s opinion I wonder how he gets from day to day knowing that in Ireland about 750,000 voted against it.

While it may not be a popular opinion I don’t think there is anything wrong with having it. It’s not like he said he’s in favour of child sex slavery. It appears once again that if you have an opinion anything other than what is publicly perceived to be correct then you’re wrong which in itself is wrong.

endacl

I suspect that my opinion may be better than yours.

gramar

gramar wrote: »

An Australian rugby player has voiced his personal opinion about same sex marriage.

That'll go down on Facebook like someone saying they kick puppies at homeless people...

Jim Bob Scratcher

My Da is stronger than yours :P

Pelvis

If you air stupid opinions then prepare to be called out of them.

tritriagain

Pelvis wrote: »

If you air stupid opinions then prepare to be called out of them.

In your opinion

Tipsy McSwagger

It's not an opinion it's a belief.

Liamalone

I have no pinion but it is the best so far in this thread.

Sonics2k

gramar wrote: »

An Australian rugby player has voiced his personal opinion about same sex marriage. Not sure why you’d bother but he decided in any case to publicly declare, respectfully it has to be said, that he’s not in favour due to his Christian beliefs. One prominent ex rugby player responded with a middle finger emoji while the always shy and retiring Donal Og Cusack, responded with a mature and considered tweet that included the line ‘rugby people shouldn’t be allowed to breed’. If that’s his reaction to one person’s opinion I wonder how he gets from day to day knowing that in Ireland about 750,000 voted against it.

While it may not be a popular opinion I don’t think there is anything wrong with having it. It’s not like he said he’s in favour of child sex slavery. It appears once again that if you have an opinion anything other than what is publicly perceived to be correct then you’re wrong which in itself is wrong.

I don't see the problem here?

Someone voiced an opinion, others disagreed with him and said so. This isn't a new thing at all.

It's a called a disagreement.

The_Valeyard

MY OPINIONS ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT MATTER

EVERYTHING ELSE IS IRRELEVANT

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE

YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED

Wait, I might be getting mixed up here.

Liamario

Opinions don't mean **** unless you have facts to back it up. Saying stupid, ignorant and potentially dangerous ****, just because it's your opinion, is asking for trouble.

Tom Mann Centuria

The important question that needs answering about all this. OP didn't mention, and really should for balance.

Did he play Rugby Union or Rugby League?

ShatterProof

Liamario wrote: »

Opinions don't mean **** unless you have facts to back it up. Saying stupid, ignorant and potentially dangerous ****, just because it's your opinion, is asking for trouble.

Prove it

Liamalone

There's two rugbys? Is one for one and the other for the other?

tritriagain

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

It's not an opinion it's a belief.

Same thing really. A belief is no more valid.

Tom Mann Centuria

Liamalone wrote: »

There's two rugbys? Is one for one and the other for the other?

There's also Rugby the place which has a large train station and one of the shortest motorways in the UK. That info should help the Aussies in making their choice in the referendum.

Guy:Incognito

Cherry picking bits of a book ( I'd be fairly so rodent he doesn't adhere to every bits of the bible rigidly ) to suit your own belief is stupid. H clearly has an issue with gay people to some degree. Hiding behind the bible just makes it worse.

He probably went against a couple of rules f4omt he bible while sitting there tweeting it in the first place.

At best he's a hypocrite.

gramar

Sonics2k wrote: »

I don't see the problem here?

Someone voiced an opinion, others disagreed with him and said so. This isn't a new thing at all.

It's a called a disagreement.

There is a way of expressing your differing opinion though.
You don't have to agree but if you seek tolerance for your opinions then you have to be prepared to show it to opinions that are at odds with your own.

tritriagain

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Cherry picking bits of a book ( I'd be fairly so rodent he doesn't adhere to every bits of the bible rigidly ) to suit your own belief is stupid. H clearly has an issue with gay people to some degree. Hiding behind the bible just makes it worse.

He probably went against a couple of rules f4omt he bible while sitting there tweeting it in the first place.


At best he's a hypocrite.

So what. He is still entitled to his opinion . I don't agree with it . In my opinion he is wrong, but white to say I'm right. Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one. If we all agreed on everything it would be a very boring world. I've had it up to my neck with "taking offence". Saw an interview with Stephen fry talking about the offended culture and his reply to "I'm offended" was well so ****ing what.

JupiterKid

What's that saying? I don't agree with you but I will defend your right to say it.

This rugger guy is a devout evangelical Christian so it's to be expected he will be anti LGBT equality. I completely disagree with him but he has a right to voice his opinion. He wasn't advocating the killing or persecution of LGBT people.

What's the likely outcome of this referendum anyway? I'd wager it'll be a good bit closer than the result here 2 years ago.

Liamalone

gramar wrote: »

There is a way of expressing your differing opinion though.
You don't have to agree but if you seek tolerance for your opinions then you have to be prepared to show it to opinions that are at odds with your own.

Of course he doesn't have to agree, it's his opinion.

I don't have any issue with same sex marriage but I can see why some folk might due to their religious beliefs. This world and it's perseverance with having to be pc all the time is a bollocks, folk have a right to disagree.

Guy:Incognito

tritriagain wrote: »

So what. He is still entitled to his opinion . I don't agree with it . In my opinion he is wrong, but white to say I'm right. Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one. If we all agreed on everything it would be a very boring world. I've had it up to my neck with "taking offence". Saw an interview with Stephen fry talking about the offended culture and his reply to "I'm offended" was well so ****ing what.

So people are entitled to their opinion to disagree with him and voice said disagreement. Which they have.

tritriagain

Liamalone wrote: »

Of course he doesn't have to agree, it's his opinion.

I don't have any issue with same sex marriage but I can see why some folk might due to their religious beliefs. This world and it's perseverance with having to be pc all the time is a bollocks, folk have a right to disagree.

Amen brother( I'm an atheist).

Guy:Incognito

JupiterKid wrote: »

What's that saying? I don't agree with you but I will defend your right to say it.

This rugger guy is a devout evangelical Christian so it's to be expected he will be anti LGBT equality. I completely disagree with him but he has a right to voice his opinion. He wasn't advocating the killing or persecution of LGBT people.

What's the likely outcome of this referendum anyway? I'd wager it'll be a good bit closer than the result here 2 years ago.

He's a devout evangelical Christian who's picking bits to suit himself.not devout enough to follow all the bits of the bible, just the ones he wants.

"I love and respect people for who they are and their opinions, but personally I will not support gay marriage"

Doesn't sound like he loves and respects gay people. Not a very Christian belief is it?

Erik Shin

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

The important question that needs answering about all this. OP didn't mention, and really should for balance.

Did he play Rugby Union or Rugby League?

Both...and Aussie rules footie too

Folau has tweeted his opinion....he's not going to get much love or support for that, he may lose some sponsorship deals to boot.... we may see a carefully worded apology by the weekend

NIMAN

You are not allowed to hold an opinion any more.

Its against the rules.

Guy:Incognito

I wonder would he have any issue if one of his teammates tweeted a belief that interracial marriage is wrong and they are opposing it. Would his Christian beliefs allow him to respect them?

tritriagain

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

He's a devout evangelical Christian who's picking bits to suit himself.not devout enough to follow all the bits of the bible, just the ones he wants.

"I love and respect people for who they are and their opinions, but personally I will not support gay marriage"

Doesn't sound like he loves and respects gay people. Not a very Christian belief is it?

No but it is his right to do so unless he breaks laws. What don't you get about this. As I already said I'm an atheist but people's religious beliefs only bother me if they influence the laws of the state so I have to practice them as well. Same sex marriage is legal in Ireland, in my opinion rightly so. It was decided democratically. That is the way forward. Let people believe what they want. To be quite honest when you tell most people their belief/opinion is wrong the become more entrenched.

Liamario

ShatterProof wrote: »

Prove it

YOU!

razorblunt

I disagree completely with Folau, but fair play at the same time for saying it. Players are often derided for being bland and opinion less and he obviously felt this is incredibly important to him and stated his belief.
Some of the responses are infuriating though, it seems impossible for anyone that have an opinion that goes against the deemed status quo.

Interestingly, Folau's team-mate at his club and country, David Pocock is a gay marriage advocate and himself and his wife stated they won't be getting married until Gay Marriage is allowed.

You could see what Dónal Óg was trying to do but his reply was ill thought out, almost as if sounded funnier in his head.

lazybones32

Let's start a campaign and get him fired. It's the right thing to do.

Annasopra

I hope Australia keeps Keith Mills

Samaris

So...there's an argument going on that yer man deserves to say what he likes because it's an opinion, but no-one else is allowed to give their opinion on his opinion because...it's mean?

- He wasn't oppressed by the government for saying it
- He wasn't fired for saying it
- He was opened to the censure and slagging of peers for what he said. Some of them took up the opportunity.

You have the right to an opinion. You don't have a right to not be criticised for it. That entire situation is pretty much working-as-intended, so why are people offended again?

Guy:Incognito

tritriagain wrote: »

No but it is his right to do so unless he breaks laws. What don't you get about this. As I already said I'm an atheist but people's religious beliefs only bother me if they influence the laws of the state so I have to practice them as well. Same sex marriage is legal in Ireland, in my opinion rightly so. It was decided democratically. That is the way forward. Let people believe what they want. To be quite honest when you tell most people their belief/opinion is wrong the become more entrenched.

People's religious beliefs are influencing the laws of a state in this case. Marriage equality in Australia could be enacted quickly with legislation but certain groups of politicians block it. So a stupid, non binding postal survey thing was dreamt up.

Giving groups of people equality shouldn't be drawn out by things like referendums

ligerdub

I think the problem there is that the fallout for him (or similar examples) is such that the repercussions become quite severe/over the top.

E.g. ostracisation, metaphorical hanging by the public mob, potential career risk etc. These are all hypotheticals of course for the moment, but there are recent examples where this has occured.

Samaris

Oh yeah, that can be a problem - internet witch-hunts. But that is a separate issue from man says something, other men slag him off for it, which appears to be what's happened so far. He's well-known and declared it publically, so he's got a more public response, but ...he did rather choose that approach.

As things stand, I don't get the whining over how we're all oppressed if we don't toe the PC line. Currently, what the complainers are demanding is exactly what happened.

Spider Web

tritriagain wrote: »

Saw an interview with Stephen fry talking about the offended culture and his reply to "I'm offended" was well so ****ing what.

I'm pretty sure Stephen Fry would object to same-sex marriage being condemned.

My point of view in this debate is that, unless the person who has voiced the unpopular opinion uses abusive language, responding to them with insults is not the way to go. But yes, disagreeing with them is also just others expressing their opinion. Being entitled to an opinion does not mean being entitled to have nobody disagree with it.

Tom Mann Centuria

Erik Shin wrote: »

Both...and Aussie rules footie too

Folau has tweeted his opinion....he's not going to get much love or support for that, he may lose some sponsorship deals to boot.... we may see a carefully worded apology by the weekend

Ah, he went to the dark side years ago.

bucketybuck

I'm sick to my hole of the constant outrage so pervasive in today's society.

Constant, unending, pious, indignant, boring ****ing outrage every time somebody dares to open their mouth. I don't even care what this guy has or hasn't said, I'm just sick of the lynch mobs waiting for their daily dose of recreational outrage.

More and more you can see how clowns like Trump get into power because seriously, we need to be done with these sanctimonious clowns already.

NIMAN

What they said

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

angryIreGamer

if you hold an opinion, dont try to claim it as fact.

you are entitled to have an opinion. if you choose to publicly air it then:
- you are not entitled to never be challenged or confronted on your opinion.
- you are not entitled to ignore other opinions or have other opinions ignored.
- you are not entitled to have your opinion respected.

lazybones32

Samaris wrote: »

So...there's an argument going on that yer man deserves to say what he likes because it's an opinion, but no-one else is allowed to give their opinion on his opinion because...it's mean?

- He wasn't oppressed by the government for saying it
- He wasn't fired for saying it
- He was opened to the censure and slagging of peers for what he said. Some of them took up the opportunity.

You have the right to an opinion. You don't have a right to not be criticised for it. That entire situation is pretty much working-as-intended, so why are people offended again?

Thing is, his opinion isn't being criticised...he is being criticised for having the opinion. "Attack the post, not the poster". And you...being a mod....

_Kaiser_

angryIreGamer wrote: »

if you hold an opinion, dont try to claim it as fact.

you are entitled to have an opinion. if you choose to publicly air it then:
- you are not entitled to never be challenged or confronted on your opinion.
- you are not entitled to ignore other opinions or have other opinions ignored.
- you are not entitled to have your opinion respected.

And yet, this only seems to be true if your opinion goes against whatever the popular consensus on the issue is.

It's an increasing problem that a certain element of society are unable to cope with differing viewpoints without themselves resorting to the same things they complain about - shouting others down, abuse, strawman arguing, attempting to discredit the author by unrelated means, bullying and harassment etc

Aside from hugely ironic, it's also dangerous as there's a big world out there beyond the handful of Western countries that spend all this time bickering in cyberspace - and the longer this goes on, the more disconnected from that real world these people will become.

angryIreGamer

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

the more disconnected from that real world these people will become.

matrix 4 confirmed

NIMAN

The Thought Police are closer than we think.

tritriagain

Spider Web wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Stephen Fry would object to same-sex marriage being condemned.

My point of view in this debate is that, unless the person who has voiced the unpopular opinion uses abusive language, responding to them with insults is not the way to go. But yes, disagreeing with them is also just others expressing their opinion. Being entitled to an opinion does not mean being entitled to have nobody disagree with it.

I agree totally. But people can object without being offended or labelling others racist,sexist etc.

Atoms for Peace

Is there a bandwagon I can hop on?

angryIreGamer

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Is there a bandwagon I can hop on?

theres two - the tolerance bandwagon and the intolerant bandwagon.

osarusan

Where's Frank Opinion when you need him?

SafeSurfer

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Cherry picking bits of a book ( I'd be fairly so rodent he doesn't adhere to every bits of the bible rigidly ) to suit your own belief is stupid. H clearly has an issue with gay people to some degree. Hiding behind the bible just makes it worse.

He probably went against a couple of rules f4omt he bible while sitting there tweeting it in the first place.

At best he's a hypocrite.

Is it not also hypocritical to campaign for equality, respect, understanding and open mindedness and then dismiss all dissenting opinion by saying those people should not breed, are a waste of oxygen etc, etc.