Is it Ethical to be fired for stating Christian beliefs

[Paidiske]

People have to give them more credit than that.

I don't think we've really earned that credit, though. Our track record is not great here...

 

[stevevw]

I don't think we've really earned that credit, though. Our track record is not great here...

That is not true. I think you take a very pessimistic view. Yes there has been some high profile situations of late that give religion and the church a bad name but that is minor compared to all the good work that has been done. There are countless good examples where religion has helped people and if it wasn't for them society would fall apart. The Salvos stepping in when a disaster happens, feeding the poor, looking after families, helping women in DV and thousands of homeless people. Ozcare which is part of St Vincent de Paul and the Catholic church is one of the biggest organisations looking after the elderly and the disabled. World Vision helping 3rd world nations. Red Cross helping with disaster relief as well as family or personal crises.

Even religious schools have produced many good outcomes for young people and still do. They usually outperform secular schools in academic outcomes but more relevant they produce better behaved people. Look at the problems with public schools at the moment and discipline. Students attacking teachers, threatening them, assaulting them to the point that teachers are having breakdowns and leaving the industry. Australia's public education system and results are some of the worse in the western world. I think religious schools have earned the right to be better regarded than what you think.

5 Benefits of Going to A Christian School
5 Benefits of Going to A Christian School - Fredericksburg Christian School
23 Amazing Ways Catholic School Benefits Students!
23 Amazing Ways Catholic School Benefits Students!

 

[Paidiske]

That is not true. I think you take a very pessimistic view.

We have reached a point where many people are no longer convinced that church, or church-run organisations, are even places of basic safety either for children or vulnerable adults. And frankly, their skepticism is warranted.

Yes, churches have done heaps of good things, and I wholeheartedly voice the line in the Creed which says I believe in the Church, but let's not be blind to the reality in our social context. We have a situation now where most of our neighbours believe religion does more harm than good. They believe that because they see all the harm we have done and continue to do.

And until we change that, until we truly repent and get right with God and our neighbours on that, we don't deserve that credit you want to claim.

Harsh words, perhaps, but it's Lent, after all; a season for reflection and repentance and putting right our wrongs.

 

[Lazarus Long]

At the end of the day Folau took RA to court and won and was compensated for being sacked and his lost wages.

Why do you persist with this lie?

 

[stevevw]

We have reached a point where many people are no longer convinced that church, or church-run organisations, are even places of basic safety either for children or vulnerable adults. And frankly, their skepticism is warranted.

Yes, churches have done heaps of good things, and I wholeheartedly voice the line in the Creed which says I believe in the Church, but let's not be blind to the reality in our social context. We have a situation now where most of our neighbours believe religion does more harm than good. They believe that because they see all the harm we have done and continue to do.

And until we change that, until we truly repent and get right with God and our neighbours on that, we don't deserve that credit you want to claim.

Harsh words, perhaps, but it's Lent, after all; a season for reflection and repentance and putting right our wrongs.

I appreciate we have done some damage and need to do some repair but its a pity because the reality is we do more good than harm. Maybe some people are being bias and not taking a fair and honest look at what is really happening. Or maybe they are not so judgmental. According to some atheists in the article below they recognize Christians do charity work better.

Worldwide, Highly Religious More Likely to Help Others
Worldwide, Highly Religious More Likely to Help Others
10 Things Christians do better than Atheists No.1 Charity work.
For all of the faults in theology, Christians have a lock on charity work. When someone thinks of Christian kindness, I doubt that they imagine brainwashing children to fear a non existent Hell and a deity who watches every move and knows your thoughts. Instead, images of soup kitchens, food shelves, homeless shelters, Habitat for Humanity,even sandbagging ahead of a flood are all things churches are known for.
10 Things Christians Do Better than Atheists - #1 Charity Work - Minnesota Atheists ~ Positive Atheism in Action Since 1991

 

[stevevw]

Why do you persist with this lie?

Sorry again strike. I keep thinking his out of out win was a court win. Still its as good as a court win for the sake of the point.

 

[KCfromNC]

At the end of the day Folau took RA to court and won and was compensated for being sacked and his lost wages.

When were the terms of the settlement made public?

 

[stevevw]

I don't think we've really earned that credit, though. Our track record is not great here...

Depends what you include in that track record. Look at all the good work religion has done. Would you say we have done more good work than bad. And even the negative is blown out of proportion. Take Catholic priests. The % of those who have acted bad is small. Are you going to wipe out all the good from the priests who have given their lives for others and disregard this. You cannot determine the way priests have acted by the small number who have acted badly.

 

[stevevw]

When were the terms of the settlement made public?

What relevance has that got to do with the fact he was paid compensation by RA.

 

[Lazarus Long]

Sorry again strike. I keep thinking his out of out win was a court win. Still its as good as a court win for the sake of the point.

Have you been taught that a lie is as good as the truth? I'm very sorry.

 

[KCfromNC]

What relevance has that got to do with the fact he was paid compensation by RA.

The fact that the terms of the agreement have not been disclosed seems pretty relevant to various claims about the terms of the agreement to me. In the sense that the fact makes the claims rather suspect - and throws doubt on related, harder to demonstrate assertions.

 

[stevevw]

The fact that the terms of the agreement have not been disclosed seems pretty relevant to various claims about the terms of the agreement to me. In the sense that the fact makes the claims rather suspect - and throws doubt on related, harder to demonstrate assertions.

I just look at it simply. When one party pays another party compensation it is usually because they have acknowledged a wrong. That is what compensation means. But I have read that Folau was awarded 3.1 million. That would make sense as his original contract was around 4 million for 4 years but he had used up around a year of it.

 

[Paidiske]

Depends what you include in that track record. Look at all the good work religion has done. Would you say we have done more good work than bad. And even the negative is blown out of proportion. Take Catholic priests. The % of those who have acted bad is small. Are you going to wipe out all the good from the priests who have given their lives for others and disregard this. You cannot determine the way priests have acted by the small number who have acted badly.

I don't believe the negative is blown out of proportion. The issue with clergy sexual abuse is not just that it happened, but the complete failure of churches to deal with it appropriately; instead their decisions made things worse for victims, and created whole new batches of victims.

Am I going to wipe out all the good from priests who don't abuse? No, after all, I'm one of them. But I can acknowledge that because of the way my church has handled things appallingly, lots of people won't trust my church; and that is completely understandable. We have not demonstrated ourselves to be trustworthy.

 

[stevevw]

I don't believe the negative is blown out of proportion. The issue with clergy sexual abuse is not just that it happened, but the complete failure of churches to deal with it appropriately; instead their decisions made things worse for victims, and created whole new batches of victims.

Am I going to wipe out all the good from priests who don't abuse? No, after all, I'm one of them. But I can acknowledge that because of the way my church has handled things appallingly, lots of people won't trust my church; and that is completely understandable. We have not demonstrated ourselves to be trustworthy.

When you put it that way I would agree. I think the same thing has happened with the Hollywood industry where a lot of people covered up the abuses of women.

 

[KCfromNC]

I just look at it simply. When one party pays another party compensation it is usually because they have acknowledged a wrong.

That's certainly one opinion. It isn't what I've read from the parties involved, of course, but it certainly is an opinion that one might decide to hold for various reasons. Or no reason at all.

But I have read that Folau was awarded 3.1 million.

I've read is was less than a tenth that. And also more than that. Lots of people are guessing, but there's no real reason to believe any of them.

 

[Lazarus Long]

I just look at it simply. When one party pays another party compensation it is usually because they have acknowledged a wrong. That is what compensation means. But I have read that Folau was awarded 3.1 million. That would make sense as his original contract was around 4 million for 4 years but he had used up around a year of it.

Have you been taught that a lie is as good as the truth? I'm very sorry.

 

[stevevw]

That's certainly one opinion. It isn't what I've read from the parties involved, of course, but it certainly is an opinion that one might decide to hold for various reasons. Or no reason at all.

Not just any opinion but legal opinion. So your saying RA wanted to give some money away just because they felt Folau was a good bloke.

I've read is was less than a tenth that. And also more than that. Lots of people are guessing, but there's no real reason to believe any of them.

Nah, Folau had already knocked back a 2 million offer. He would have gone to court if the offer was that low. It took a bit to come out but its all coming out now that it was 3.1 million which is about spot on for the balance of his contract. RA also had to pay his court fees of 1.5 million which is another indication that shows he was paid compensation and RA has admitted fault. They also have to pay their own legal fees of around 1 million. That means this little episode with Folau have cost them nearly 6 million all up.

The interesting thing is the RA board was willing and expected to pay even more than 3.1 million. This shows they had resigned themselves to paying Folau whatever the costs.

Following a drawn-out court process, the matter was settled confidentially late last year. It's understood RA paid out Folau $3.1 million, and also covered his $1.5 million in legal expenses.Jan 29, 2020
www.dailytelegraph.com.au › sport › nrl › news-story

As one RA director told The Weekend Australian, Castle was given freedom to negotiate within a certain range of money but ended up pleasantly surprising the board by reporting back with a much smaller figure than they had been bracing for – believed to be around $3 million.

Further digging produced what would seem to be a far more reasonable amount of $3.1m, which curiously enough was a figure bounced around right at the beginning of this saga.

Given that Folau would have been paid $5m had his contract run its course, the suspicion is that this would have been around the upper limit imposed by the RA board. That she came in well under that is a mark in her favour, although clearly RA’s legal bill – thought to be around $1m – still has to be paid.
NoCookies | The Australian

 

[KCfromNC]

Not just any opinion but legal opinion. So your saying RA wanted to give some money away just because they felt Folau was a good bloke.

No, I'm saying that your posts appear to be fabricating claims that can't be backed up by actual evidence.

Nah, Folau had already knocked back a 2 million offer. He would have gone to court if the offer was that low.

Unless his attorneys advised him that he would lose in court. Or he needed money now. Or he was tired of the bad press.

We can speculate all day long. None of that speculation is a good basis for making confident assertions about the confidential settlement.

Following a drawn-out court process, the matter was settled confidentially late last year. It's understood RA paid out Folau $3.1 million, and also covered his $1.5 million in legal expenses.Jan 29, 2020
www.dailytelegraph.com.au › sport › nrl › news-story

As one RA director told The Weekend Australian, Castle was given freedom to negotiate within a certain range of money but ended up pleasantly surprising the board by reporting back with a much smaller figure than they had been bracing for – believed to be around $3 million.

Even your source says this is a guess. Like I said, one of many.

 

[stevevw]

No, I'm saying that your posts appear to be fabricating claims that can't be backed up by actual evidence.

Such as

Unless his attorneys advised him that he would lose in court. Or he needed money now. Or he was tired of the bad press.

Then why would he knock back a 2 million offer and take a 300k one. Doesn't make sense.

We can speculate all day long. None of that speculation is a good basis for making confident assertions about the confidential settlement.

The settlement is no longer confidential. The info had to come out sooner or later. Nothing is kept secret from the media. Someone with inside info leaked it to the press. But we can make some pretty confident assertions as well ie There is evidence Folau knocked back a 2 million dollar offer even RA has acknowledged that. So the offer was at least 2 million or more. Israel Folau rejected $2 million payout from Rugby Australia
Israel Folau rejected $2 million payout from Rugby Australia - report
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby...2-million-payout-from-rugby-australia--report

Even your source says this is a guess. Like I said, one of many.

If you read the Australian News article it is not a guess but information from a RA board member. But hey it doesn't matter. The fact is RA paid Folau compensation for what they had done.

 

[loveofourlord]

There was a rather funny case with the last major earthquake in the San Francisco bay area. One pastor called it God's judgement on Gays and BASEBALL! The background is that it happened on the day that should have opened the World Series which was between San Francisco and Oakland. That the quake did far more damage in the Oakland area which sort of made the gays claim not fit well was bad enough. But the baseball part got 'better'. That area has double decker freeways and one of them collapsed. It was during rush hour. The freeway should have been bumper to bumper and hundreds or even thousands would have dies. But everyone had left work early or went to sports bars near their work to not miss any of the game. They were spared because of their interest in baseball!

DOH!

Reminds me of the gay shield that was jokingly labled in new orleans during katrina, where the area least hit was the area with the most gays despite pastors saying it was gods wrath.