Share
7,208 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 236
clock Created with Sketch.
31/05/19
14:06
Share
Originally posted by Crom Valen:
↑
Professional sport relies on sponsors, broadcasters, and the paying public - end of story. Folau can hold his views but he can’t use the increased influence and following that rugby gives his to publicise views that alienate certain groups in society. This is a sporting code, not a politicised group that is taking one side over another. All players would need to be respectful and inclusive to all. A white player could not use his position to widely air racist views, a gay player could not use his position as a platform to attack women, a left-wing player could not use his position to call for revolution against the capitalist machine. People are entitled to hold their own views, and Folau can certainly continue to air his views. That is free speech. But he won’t be doing it while employed to positively represent Australian Rugby. Players are contracted to be positive ambassadors and bridge builders, so it’s not just about what they do on the field.
Expand
According to that he wouldn't be allowed by RA to go into his church on a Sunday and say it to the congregation either - given the only difference is the platform used to say it on - no impact on freedom of speech there? - employed by RA can't speak in church. If it goes to court IF wins