Manly Inclusive Pride jersey backlash

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’ve never watched gay porn , I’m not gay, I love Chinese food and I support the WT. This is my choice , others have their own choices. I could not give a @&@@ what people think is right for me .
When it comes to respect , people that are against other human beings celebrating any occasion, are a rear bred that I discriminate against.
There are no belief's once you cross that white line , you could be playing next to a doctor, what he does not fit in because it’s not the nor amongst players, come on ,keep this rubbish at home.
Respect is earned , show some .
 
I studied science, also known as reality.
So science disproves Christian rules regarding Jewish laws in the Old Testament which people on this forum seem to think Christians are bound by?

I go to Mass with cardiologists, evolutionary scientists, nurses etc. What's your point?
 
To me, these blokes refusing to play in this jersey is no different than if a white player refused to play in the indigenous jersey because they didn't want to be associated with anything indigenous.

The religious angle is just a cop out.
 
I'm not being cynical, but
In what regard exactly?

They're definitely not
religious theologians..

I'm on the 'to each his own'
side of things for the record
Just present a very "outside looking in" view. Harris and Hitchens never seem to actually want to get a grasp of it but would rather strawman. Peterson has decent knowledge but again, not actually adhering to it himself means his takes are somewhat lacking as I don't think he has a proper "feel for it"
 
These rules are from Deuteronomy. Bible part 2 did contradict a lot of the rules and ideas from Bible Part
"Bible part 2" CHANGED the rules. I'd suggest reading in Galatians when St. Paul says that we are no longer saved by the Jewish works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ. Christ signifies a new covenant with man, where the practice and rules for followers are different.
 
About 10 years ago an Australian cricketer, Fawad Ahmed, was given permission to cover up the VB sponsorship on his playing shirt because alcohol offended his religion. He offered to forgo part of his salary, but that didn't stop sections of the media from railing against the decision.

I wonder these days whether a player could ask to have alcohol/gambling sponsorship removed from their jersey on grounds of religion or principle? The nrl has said that a team can't have players in different jerseys, but would covering up a sponsor's logo offend that rule?
 
The trim actually looks good. Looks like cernovis or some health company colours . If it was never brought up , I would have thought it’s a sponsor .
 
So science disproves Christian rules regarding Jewish laws in the Old Testament which people on this forum seem to think Christians are bound by?

I go to Mass with cardiologists, evolutionary scientists, nurses etc. What's your point?
This tactic of arguing against what you want, instead of what people said just makes people walk away.
 
Wooooooowww
I have a confession that’s raised from this topic
No I’m not coming out. Jokes aside.

i am so deeply sorry for using a moron term before that may offend others.
Using certain words is not on.
I will only acknowledge the word if KUL allows , otherwise you will not see me use this stupid word again.
 
Yet another guy who strawmans and has zero understanding of Christianity. The only thing that stopped Carlin embarrassing himself every time he got on stage was the fact his audience are equally clueless

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, remove the middle man.

The old adage that a person is smart, people are dumb is applicable here.
 
Last edited:
This is the whole reason you don't wade into these pursuits as a sporting organisation.

Yep, being inclusive is nice. But this is tokenistic. As all these gestures are. Manly demonstrated they were an inclusive club the day Ian Roberts came out and was henceforth supported and celebrated as a legend of that club.

'No comment. As a sporting organisation, we don't comment on matters of political or moral contention, that is a matter for each individual'.

That's how these things should be responded to in my opinion.
 
could the manly heirachy knew this could happen? Maybe they wanted it to happen?
Well they apparently sold all the jerseys in a heartbeat so that must say something.
Both sides of this argument want their cake and eat it too.
I'm a heterosexual male and somewhat homophobic but I like to think I'm compassionate, respectful and understanding towards people who are not like me. I appreciate people who treat me in the same way.
As long as people with various agendas don't force their beliefs, opinions and lifestyles onto other people then I can't see a problem.
I might sound hypocritical here because
I was very opinionated against the possibility of a transexual NRLW player being allowed to play in the competition. I felt that impacted on women playing the sport and me watching it.
This jersey design is different. It is not offensive to look at and it imo looks cool.
A viewer wouldn't even know what it's all about unless told them so I think these protesting players need to chill.
God knows if someone one does or doesn't support the things that are against their religion. Before and after the game they can take the jersey off and put on a training strip and that in itself will make another statement without endangering Manly's season.
 
  • Love
Reactions: BZN
This is the whole reason you don't wade into these pursuits as a sporting organisation.

Yep, being inclusive is nice. But this is tokenistic. As all these gestures are. Manly demonstrated they were an inclusive club the day Ian Roberts came out and was henceforth supported and celebrated as a legend of that club.

'No comment. As a sporting organisation, we don't comment on matters of political or moral contention, that is a matter for each individual'.

That's how these things should be responded to in my opinion.

Yeah I think it is getting to that point now. As Stryker said, when the season is on the line as a fan, you want to see your full strength team run out, and this could well torpedo them and cause disunity among the fans and playing group. It's a shame that something that was intended to be a gesture of inclusion could well wind up doing the opposite.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Members online

Back
Top