another annoyance.

my phone was in flight mode all of last night. no wifi no bluetooth. it's dropped 4% overnight.

wth!

so i open the battery app and it says 

swiftkey keyboard background 7h 12 min (which by the way has had background activity turned off)

googleplay services 7h 12 min

so perhaps something google was awake and it took the keyboard with it. 

Batman:

another annoyance.

 

my phone was in flight mode all of last night. no wifi no bluetooth. it's dropped 4% overnight.

 

wth!

oh cr#p

Batman:

 

Someone pointed out that the bible also says no tattoos allowed, if you raise your voice at your brother it's the same as committing murder, if you look at a woman "that way" it's the same as committing adultery, if you want something your brother has it's the same as committing theft, and that all sin is the same, no one sin is greater or lesser than another. I wonder if he has any tattoo, or looked at a woman "that way", wanted a new tech badly, or gotten angry on the rugby field.

I don't know, I mean, I obviously don't agree with his statements and think they are disgusting. But something about talking about "inclusiveness" while sacking and banishing someone for their religious views doesn't sit quite right. Unless he's gone as far as making actual threats or carried out action against the people he opposes (admit I've not followed it in great depth).

I imagine quite a few other players agree with him and quite a few people in society who are deeply religious in at least 2 maybe 3 religions also agree. They are smart enough if they are in high positions or high profile to keep quiet about it.

If it ever got to a court of law then it will be very interesting to see how it will impact on all employees who have certain views. Maybe that is why he is doing it?

Handle9:

 

He is publicly engaging in discrimination based on a protected attribute. In a workplace context that is illegal. If he had ranted about race, gender or age it would be the same.

 

He's a public figure who knows this. It's also not the first time. Last time he dared Rugby Australia to fire him.

 

He's either trying to get fired or he's horrifically stupid.

 

I choose to believe it's the first.

 

Can you explain to me where the discrimination has occurred?

tukapa1:

networkn:

 

I wonder how long it is till he has an NRL contract, I am going to suggest less than a month. I would be amazed if they refused him on morality reasons.

 

 

 

 

 

Be amazed.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/111983373/code-red-inclusive-nrl-slams-the-door-on-possible-israel-folau-return

Yeah, I saw that this morning, didn't have time to comment on it prior to my surgery.

I am amazed. 

invisibleman18:

 

I don't know, I mean, I obviously don't agree with his statements and think they are disgusting. But something about talking about "inclusiveness" while sacking and banishing someone for their religious views doesn't sit quite right. Unless he's gone as far as making actual threats or carried out action against the people he opposes (admit I've not followed it in great depth).

He is a preacher in his own church, it's clear he truly believes this. I believe what he wrote would be protected under religious reasons. 

I mean, to me it feels dumb him saying what he said in a public manner like this. Should he lose his contract over it.. I am having very mixed feelings. I feel there is a lot of grey in this. I think they had to sack him, no real choice, but it still doesn't sit quite right with me. 

The reality is, he is standing for what he believes, which is something I admire in people and try to do my best to do to. He is likely going to lose $2M a year which shows the level of his conviction. I do not believe it falls under discriminatory as I don't believe what he wrotes precludes anyone

in the groups he identified as doing or participating in anything. It would be different he was the boss of ARU and said he wouldn't hire homosexuals. 

networkn,

Maybe as someone high profile he is being backed in this stance to test the waters of what employers can and can't do. 

The other interesting thing is the Qantas angle as country that owns the airline that has major deals in place with Qantas would agree what what he says admittingly in a 'hell' run by a different group.

As a drunkard I can confirm that I am not offended by Folau's criticism of people like me. 

Jas777:

 

networkn,

 

 

 

Maybe as someone high profile he is being backed in this stance to test the waters of what employers can and can't do. 

 

The other interesting thing is the Qantas angle as country that owns the airline that has major deals in place with Qantas would agree what what he says admittingly in a 'hell' run by a different group.

 

His contract will be the final word on it. I believe it unlikely us mere mortals would ever get to see it. If he signed something that said he would promote inclusiveness, then he would be sacked under that clause, but honestly, why would he sign such a document knowing how he feels. I believe the wording will be much less clear and give quite a big of wiggle room. He would have reason in my view to challenge it legally depending on the wording, but whether he will, is another story.

He seems a principled person. The money he is getting won't matter to him as much as standing up for what he believes and the loss of his sporting career in my view will be less of an issue for him, than it will for others.

I don't believe he will have many regrets, certainly not now. I wonder if in 10-15 years time he may hold a different view and feel differently.

In my view it's an insane waste of talent, but I don't believe there will be any shortage of job offers to come his way, from organizations who either don't oppose, or support his views.

MileHighKiwi:

 

As a drunkard I can confirm that I am not offended by Folau's criticism of people like me. 

 

that's because we're the most liberal of all kind.

:)

and on the subject. AU/NZ/EUROPE screams for tolerance and how everyone should have the same level of tolerance, but when someone stands for his/her believes (not necessarily good or bad, just different) - people start point fingers and shame/blame/name.

oh well, media.

I believe ARU may need to be very careful with sacking him too early. They need to give him a reasonable amount of time to respond. I'd say a week is enough. Sacking him prior would leave them open to being unreasonable. Given what a big deal it is, he could claim he needed additional time to take advice and prepare himself for his defense and discussion. I do believe however, that he would be required to indicate this to ARU. I am not a lawyer, but as an employer this my understanding.

Having said that, he was just spotted at a cafe and when asked if he regretted his comments, he simply responded "No". I am unsure what else he was likely to say.