I think you’ll find a lot of work contracts have all kinds of stuff hidden in there, most people never read them in their entirety.
Certainly his contract with Rugby League certainly stipulated certain things which he broke and when warned broke again. So I am wondering who put him up to this and what’s really all behind it?
I detect a lack of certainty in this assertion
Only repeating what I’ve read in the press. If you really want to know ask Israel.
I think he has a very good chance of winning his case against the ARU. No matter what Peter Gordon says on SEN, employment contracts cannot infringe on civil rights, and even if Folau is a silly tossbag, he stated a well-held religious point of view which I would suggest is a protected civil right in this country.
I was just being a smarty pants. You used the words ‘certainty’ and ‘certain’ three times in one short sentence. Idle hands
It’s certainly a good case to test both the breadth and the strength of that right in Australia.
That said, as far as I’m aware we actually don’t have a a right to ‘freedom of speech’ in Australia. Yes, we talk about it a lot but it’s a US concept that we’ve imported into political discussion. The courts here have given some expression to it in the implied right to political communication.
Does Folau’s tweet fall attract the protection of that implied right? Hard to say, I reckon. Arguably not but it depends on how widely the court is prepared to interpret ‘political communication’.
Its more about his work creating strings to his freedoms.
I like villains we can boo in sport. Dont see or understand the fascination with brand.
He has every right to make the Tweet and have his views heard, … the only issue is his work contract strictly forbade him from doing so on such subjects, which he agreed to and signed up for. Then he breached that contract and was summarily dismissed, and THAT should be an end to it, … why it isn’t, & how it’s become somehow about “Free speech” is fkn beyond me.
Seriously, can we not do to this thread what we’ve done to an entire indigenous way of existence?
There’s at least two other threads for this.
I would have thought that Australia’s black History includes those from the Pacific Islands seeing how we farked them over well and truly also.
If we were discussing the utterances from Anthony Mundine would you see it differently.
Is it not abundantly clear what this topic is about, Bacchus?
History was yesterday as well as before Capt Cook we learn from it all
Seems it’d be up to the mods to shift posts to the appropriate thread and give some posting advice.
As you are so fond of saying, … You should PM Mendozzza. 
IIRC correctly “freedom of speech” is only implied as per the high court, it’s not in the constitution. “Freedom of religion” however, is one of five entrenched rights listed, so he could be successful on that front. IMO it’s really about religion and not freedom of speech.
Speaking of, I’ve neen thinking performing a social experience Mott style where I state that the religious freedom bill opens the door for nation wide adoption of Shria law
I would like to see a Bible where the word homosexuals is written which hasn’t been altered from the original text.
I’m honestly not sure whether or not that would work better if you spell it correctly…
I have a friend in Queensland, who’s rellies were kidnapped from Vanuatu and bought to Australia and used as sugar cane cutters. There is not much mention of that in our Australian History. They were called Knakks. (I’m not sure how that should be spelt.)
Many natives were deported, some were allowed to stay and a lot died from various illnesses and were buried in unmarked mass graves which are still being uncovered.
So, the original boat people were stolen from their homelands by Australians, long before the boat people from Asia and other countries became known as illegals from Asia and were put into detention. This country has done it all before.
Kanakas…is what I thought. Rhyming with Maccas. Practice was called ‘blackbirding’.