Manly Inclusive Pride jersey backlash

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cobarcats said:
What's the big deal. It doesn't have writing on the jersey that says Gays are Great or something like that, it's a flaming rainbow 🌈 pattern isn't it.
IMO, religion is often wrongly portrayed by symbols and tokens and not what it should be, love, compassion and charity.
Having a rainbow on a jersey isn't hurting anyone, how can you possibly say the symbol is encroaching on someone's beliefs.
I understand that Manly should have consulted the players first but I still think it's way over the top.
Let's talk and play footy.
Click to expand...
It's the principal... Not the rainbow or the symbol. It's what it represents

Imagine a jersey covered in swastikas or KKK logos...
 
So, I'd say this point has already been raised . . . . but what happens when players are forced to wear a jersey decorated with a beautiful image of our Lord Jesus Christ ?
Of course, that wouldn't be fair . . . forcing people to wear/promote something they didn't believe in.
 
  • Love
Reactions: BZN
Tiger-ferret said:
I thought Peterson has a fairly we’ll read view on the topic? Would love to hear your thoughts on why he doesn’t understand Christianity?
Click to expand...
He’s not tremendously far off. He just views a conglomeration of denominations from the outside. Christianity is a lived faith and I don’t think it can only be understood intellectually. I also think people like Nietzsche and Jung have influenced his views on it a little too much and they are quite misguided
 
Tigerdave said:
No it's pick and mix Christianity, which most Christians are. "Oh but Jesus got rid of those old laws" and yet we have this lot claiming it's against their religion....even though Jesus said nothing about it.
Click to expand...
I think the point is very different.

Do you lump different Christianity together? Why not just lump all religions together as the same? Muslims and Christians are just “religious” vs atheist.

LBGTV have all been lumped together. I don’t assume they all want to be but a lot of people do.

Like lumping all Asians or all Africans or Europeans. Or do you just say east v west. Developed vs undeveloped. Rich vs poor. Educated vs non educated?

What make you think that where you draw the line is appropriate?
 
krissy said:
I respect a person’s right to believe in whatever religion they like but I do not respect them using that religion to exclude people or make people feel without value.
What message does it send to gay people in the football community or the community in general? Sorry that is the most unchristian attitude there is. Just be good people and include everyone, it isn’t a difficult concept.
A religion that excludes people because they are different is a poor excuse for a religion.
I might add before I get accused of hating religion, I was educated at a religious school, had a very conservative upbringing and also have many gay family members & friends.
Click to expand...
I agree with what you have said. Treat everyone equally, regardless of Race,Creed, Colour,Religion or Sexual Preference. But, everybody is entitled to their opinion and just because it doesn't align with yours, doesn't make yours more important.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BZN
formerguest said:
Paedophiles, not homosexuals.
Click to expand...
This'll start WWIII.
But I'm serious . . . . why do we not define the horrid notion of pedophiles one step further and accept there are homosexual, and hetero pedophiles based on the sex of their victims ?
They are both as disgusting as each other, but surely a pedo who commits his atrocities on a young boy is both a homosexual, and a pedo ? . .. just as a hetero committing the atrocities is hetero and a pedo.
I don't know how those sick XXXXX think, but it seems a fairly straightforward definition to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BZN
innsaneink said:
It's the principal... Not the rainbow or the symbol. It's what it represents

Imagine a jersey covered in swastikas or KKK logos...
Click to expand...
KKK or swastikas 🤔 come on ink, that's a bit extreme isn't it?
That rainbow isn't offensive nor does it symbolise gassing millions of jews or hanging African Americans.
Homosexuality is here to stay (not what is ideal for me) and it's up to all if us to find a way to live together without making each other uncomfortable.
If this inoffensive jersey helps a young lad or lass feel their lives are important then that's a good thing.
Are you going to cast the first stone?
By the way, I am a Christian but I don't support mainframe churches and man made idealisms.
 
I would like to see other minority groups get some jersey recognition too.
Let's not forget the biggest minority group in the world, The disabled? I'm not against recognition and support for the gays and lesbians, and we do a pretty good job when it comes to Indigenous, but how about we have a show of support for the disabled and the Chinese, whose population in Australia is similar to the Indigenous?
 
Tiger-ferret said:
I think the point is very different.

Do you lump different Christianity together? Why not just lump all religions together as the same? Muslims and Christians are just “religious” vs atheist.

LBGTV have all been lumped together. I don’t assume they all want to be but a lot of people do.

Like lumping all Asians or all Africans or Europeans. Or do you just say east v west. Developed vs undeveloped. Rich vs poor. Educated vs non educated?

What make you think that where you draw the line is appropriate?
Click to expand...
Huh?

The majority of Christians are pick and mix in relation to Biblical views, thus emphasising how interpretation comes into play.

I never said all or even a majority of Christians believe the same things, they don't. Which is why there's 200+ denominations.

Same with every other religion.

For these players to say "their religion forbids this" or words to that effect, it's not entirely accurate unless they quote Old Testament and then we run into all the other laws in the OT that they probably don't worry about.
 
Cultured_Bogan said:
That's your assessment. The fact that Christianity as a whole is trending down (at least in Australia,) would suggest that people feel it is outdated and has little to no relevance in the modern world.

I was raised a Catholic, attended Church most Sundays, did my Confirmation and Communion. I chose Francis of Assisi as my saint protector, a rich man who gave up his the wealth that was his birthright to bring light to the plight of the poor and sick. I would then sit in a Church on Sundays owned by one of the wealthiest organisations on the planet that spent resources on covering up routine child sex abuse rather than resolving the problem and accepting that horrific things had been done by men of God under their stewardship.

You say that people don't "understand" Christianity. They understand what they are exposed to. There's something like 200 denominations of Christianity all with individual interpretations of the Bible and the teachings of Christ. Naturally adherents of any individual denomination think they have it right. The USA exists because Puritans didn't think the Anglican Church had it right. No different to Sunni Muslims thinking that the Shia branch has it wrong.

I don't think spirituality is the problem anymore, or even the belief in a personal God. We're not at the point yet (and may never get there,) where we can conclusively disprove God as a driving force, no matter how our expanding knowledge of the world and universe around us improves. Organised religion is a problem.

The old adage that a person is smart, people are dumb is applicable here.
Click to expand...
So would St. Francis of Assisi vouched for the actions of the Church in those regards? An insititution can be corrupted but the teachings given to them are what we are faithful to, not the clergy themselves. Many Saints found themselves in terrible times of Church history and worked to reform it.

Also the fact religion isn’t as popular as it used to be means nothing. So people have been exposed to decades of pop culture making fun of religion and blatantly pushing irreligious messages.

As for many denominations yes I agree, I don’t follow the heretical Protestant sects, I don’t care what they teach. I follow the faith as practiced since the time of Christ and that which was founded by Christ.

If you want to talk further inbox me
 
  • Like
Reactions: BZN
Tigerdave said:
No it's pick and mix Christianity, which most Christians are. "Oh but Jesus got rid of those old laws" and yet we have this lot claiming it's against their religion....even though Jesus said nothing about it.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid that isn’t how it works. I’d suggest a little research on the New Testament and how Orthodox Christian teachings are formed.
 
DGilly said:
So would St. Francis of Assisi vouched for the actions of the Church in those regards? An insititution can be corrupted but the teachings given to them are what we are faithful to, not the clergy themselves. Many Saints found themselves in terrible times of Church history and worked to reform it.

Also the fact religion isn’t as popular as it used to be means nothing. So people have been exposed to decades of pop culture making fun of religion and blatantly pushing irreligious messages.

As for many denominations yes I agree, I don’t follow the heretical Protestant sects, I don’t care what they teach. I follow the faith as practiced since the time of Christ and that which was founded by Christ.

If you want to talk further inbox me
Click to expand...


*Education
 
DGilly said:
So would St. Francis of Assisi vouched for the actions of the Church in those regards? An insititution can be corrupted but the teachings given to them are what we are faithful to, not the clergy themselves. Many Saints found themselves in terrible times of Church history and worked to reform it.

Also the fact religion isn’t as popular as it used to be means nothing. So people have been exposed to decades of pop culture making fun of religion and blatantly pushing irreligious messages.

As for many denominations yes I agree, I don’t follow the heretical Protestant sects, I don’t care what they teach. I follow the faith as practiced since the time of Christ and that which was founded by Christ.

If you want to talk further inbox me
Click to expand...

No I think we'll leave it there, I have pretty fixed opinions on organised religion based on life experiences.

I am in agreeance that the institutions can be corrupted, that was the point I was making. And no, I don't believe St. Francis would have ascribed to the actions of the Church, I believe he adhered to the original message of Christ. It all comes back to the organised nature of religion (not just Christianity,) where the message is changed/corrupted/watered down.

I do appreciate the respectful and considered response. It's nice to have a civil discussion/disagreement.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 368 (members: 2, guests: 366)
Back
Top