Two ‘trigger words’ may have cost rugby star Israel Folau his career

Two ‘trigger words’ may have cost rugby star Israel Folau his career June 3, 2019

A REPORT on Christian website Faithwire suggests that Australia’s God-crazed Israel Folau’s sacking could have been avoided if he omitted two words from his homophobic post on Instagram: ‘Warning’ and ‘Hell’.

Images via Instagram and YouTube

Folau’s contract, worth over $5 million, was terminated by Rugby Australia after a disciplinary process concluded with an appeal panel finding him guilty of a “high level breach” of professional conduct.

Some of those following the case have insisted that Folau would have been spared punishment if he had deleted the two key words from the post, to ensure it exactly matched the original scriptures.

A source told Australia’s Daily Telegraph:

Everyone has missed the key here, have a look at the post, it says ‘Warning’ and ‘Hell’, but the Bible verse does not mention either word. But if he had removed that image and re-posted word for word what the verse says, they couldn’t have sacked him.

Will Maule, writing for Faithwire, said:

While the words ‘Warning’ and ‘Hell’ are not directly mentioned in the original scripture, it’s fairly evident those are accurate implications of the verse, which reads as follows: 

’Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.’ (NIV)

As a result of the Instagram post and subsequent disciplinary action, 
six of Folau’s sponsors; Qantas, Vodafone, Land Rover, ASICS, Accenture and HSBC have indicated they will part ways with the star.

The 30-year-old is reportedly considering taking his case up with the 
Fair Work Commission or even the country’s Supreme Court. Folau did, however, refuse to go through the full appeals process with Rugby Australia, highlighting his lack of confidence in the sporting body. He said in a statement:

My decision not to commence Rugby Australia’s appeal process is in no way an acceptance of the judicial panel’s findings. I simply do not have confidence in Rugby Australia’s ability to treat me fairly or lawfully throughout this process.

Following the final ruling to ditch Folau ahead of the 2019 Rugby World Cup, a former international coach vented his outrage about the case. Alan Jones launched an impassioned defence of Folau noting that the decision:

Prompts you to wonder what kind of society we’re living in. The Australian people won’t accept this. This is not the Australia our veterans fought for and we’re going to have to take our country back by argument and by the democratic and peaceful process – not by hate and revenge or vilification and intimidation.

Jones noted that:

If we’re not free to articulate our religious beliefs and quote from the Bible, and if we’re not free to speak for fear that someone affects a hurt or is part of the offence industry, if that’s where we’ve reached in this country, we’ve reached a dark place and we are all at risk.

"Atheists were certainly not immune from the racism common in the nineteenth and early twentieth ..."

Atheism, Race, and the Freethinker at ..."
"A scenario:A heterosexual, very religious, couple decide to get married. They approach a baker for ..."

Franklin Graham leads paranoid charge against ..."
"Franklin's new-found concern for women is laughable, especially, like his father, he lives in terror ..."

Franklin Graham leads paranoid charge against ..."
"Greg Jordan regarding Franklin Graham:He is nothing like his father.Billy Graham was a bigot. He ..."

Franklin Graham leads paranoid charge against ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • CoastalMaineBird

    by the democratic and peaceful process – not by hate and revenge or vilification and intimidation.

    Wow – isn’t THAT rich, coming from a defender of Folau. I can’t see “revenge” in there, but it sure looks like Folau had “hate”, “vilification”, and “intimidation” in mind when he posted that.

  • Michael Neville

    Poor Folau, he posted bigotry and is now whining because he’s being called a bigot and is facing the consequences of being a bigot.

  • Jim Jones

    ….

  • Jim Jones

    If we’re not free to articulate our religious beliefs and quote from the Bible, and if we’re not free to speak for fear that someone affects a hurt or is part of the offence industry, if that’s where we’ve reached in this country, we’ve reached a dark place and we are all at risk.

    What made him think it was OK to be an a‌ss‌hole – and that there are no consequences for that?

    And why won’t people like him go after the true evil: Ezekiel 16:49 New International Version (NIV)

    49 “‘Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy.

    (Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by The Freethinker) – really? No freethinking allowed?

  • Jemolk

    Ha, ha, no. He doesn’t like the consequences of his bigotry, he can cut it out. Doesn’t matter one bit what his justification is. There are definitely strong arguments for treating social media as the new “public square,” but this waste of space is not among them, and the ones that exist needn’t apply to him.

  • Sau Peih

    While I do agree there is an “offence industry” (people have found it profitable and it shuts down all debate on certain topics), Jones is diving straight into victimhood (another course people have found profitable that also shuts down all debate on certain topics).

    And to Folau, the cherry picker: Lev 19:28.

  • Kit Hadley-Day

    well quite, they have the absolute right to say hateful things, what they don’t have in immunity from the results of doing so, what stings them is they used to.

  • Anri

    If we’re not free to articulate our religious beliefs and quote from the Bible, and if we’re not free to speak for fear that someone affects a hurt or is part of the offence industry, if that’s where we’ve reached in this country, we’ve reached a dark place and we are all at risk.

    He did articulate his religious beliefs. They’re right there, I can see them. No-one prevented him.
    Then, afterwards, other people – in this case his sponsors – articulated their beliefs in a meaningful way: with their feet and pocketbooks.

    That’s how this works – that’s how all of this works.

  • Michael Neville

    Exactly. What some people, in this case Christians seeing their dominant position slipping away, fail to realize is that free speech does not mean freedom from consequences.

  • Broga

    Christians have long considered that free speech is entirely free as long as it is the freedom to state that of which they approve.

  • rubaxter

    More Snowflake Whistling Past the Graveyard.

    His entire tweet was bigoted tripe that none of the sponsors would have tolerated, and he’d have been flushed from the fame OTHERS paid to support and enhance.

    He can still rant to his CTE brain’s delight, he’ll just have to do it on his own penny and with his own PR firm to follow-up.

    Christers don’t understand bidness OR real freedom of speech.

  • rubaxter

    Religious children don’t understand bidness OR real freedom of speech.

  • Barry Duke

    Trigger words alert: Some of you may be wondering why your comments have been delayed. This is because Disqus is now ushering comments with “unacceptable” words” into the moderation queue. Two comments held back contained the words “strip” and “kill”. This screenshot shows other banned words. We are working to stop this nonsense: https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4659314915fea02b48d27ecb0ac62bb16e15af60930e7ea40006aba7f189b8cb.jpg

  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower

    Israel Falau is there to entertain, NOT to ‘enlighten’ with his bigoted nonsense.

    If he doesn’t like it, he should have long since quit and lived on the income of a typically poor preacherman.

  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower

    “Freedom for ME but *not* for thee…”

  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower

    Borrowing a quote again, “To a person in a position of privilege, equality can look like persecution”.

  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower
  • HairyEyedWordBombThrower
  • Lurker111

    Well, if that’s accurate, that’s really fubared.

  • Tracey

    No sect is more fervent in their bigoted belief in immaculate conception than atheists.

    If you suggest to them that the universe might not have spontaneously burst out of the box and started assembling itself, the spirit of outrage overtakes them.

    They start shaking and foaming at the mouth; lashing out at anything at hand.

    It’s always best to keep them at arms length, and enjoy life as if they were not around.

  • Tracey

    No s3ct is more fervent in their bigoted belief in immaculate conc3ption than @th3ists.

    If you suggest to them that the universe might not have spontaneously burst out of the box and started assembling itself in complete order, the spirit of 0utr@ge overtakes them.

    They start shaking and fo@ming at the mouth; l@shing out at anything at hand; it can get uglie and usually does.

  • Chemistry and physics are not random processes, Tracey. There are well-established physical reasons for the universe being the way it is. If the properties of matter and energy were different then the universe would probably be configured differently, which is perfectly fine (although we personally might not be here to observe it).

    Still no credible evidence for gods, though. Got any? 😀

  • Tracey

    Physics are a universal constant.

    Physics does not support any conditions under which all matter that exists comes together into one, dense ball, exploding into infinity under instantaneously coherent conditions…on its own.

    The “G0d” theory has as much scientific proof as the Big B@ng being spontaneous.

  • ConnieHinesDorothyProvine

    Can these people disappear already?

  • How do you know that physics doesn’t support such a thing? Show your math — literally. Drop the equation that says it’s impossible right here for us to examine.

    You’re also wrong about the “exploding into infinity under instantaneously coherent conditions” part. The universe has been expanding for nearly fifteen billion years, which is hardly what I would call “instantaneous,” and the oldest stars we can observe are not infinitely far away.

    I see no reason whatsoever to believe that there’s a preexisting, eternal, super-powerful sentient being behind all this.

  • Tracey

    Using the Large Hadron Collider, we’ve observed quark-gluon plasma, which is the densist matter we can understand to exist.

    Yet it is the by-product of the Big B@ng, not the precursor.

    We will someday understand what the universe was like, a hundred trillionth of a second after the Big B@ng, perhaps. But we will never model the conditions even a googolplexian second before.

    The math does not exist.

  • Tracey

    “…and the oldest stars we can observe are not infinitely far away“

    Anyone see the problem with this statement?

  • No, not really — there may be older stars that we can’t currently see, but my statement is accurate.

  • Tracey

    Your statement didn’t include the *fact* that we can only see a fraction of stars (or other bodies) in the universe, and none are anywhere close to the oldest.

    It was a misleading comment, without substance.

  • Tracey

    Lot going on in that cartoon bubble of yours. Unfortunately, none of it is worth thoughtful consideration.

  • Are you familiar with the Hubble deep space field image? The galaxies portrayed in it are quite close in age to the current estimated age of the universe (which is currently around 14.7 billion years). It’s also an indescribably beautiful image.

  • Suit yourself. *shrug*

  • Tracey

    Saw it.

    I’ve also seen live, deep space images from KECK I …’cause I was standing in the control room.

    Doesn’t answer any of your questions, nor does it disprove anything I’ve postulated.

    Postulate is a good word. It’s a positive statement that leaves room for error. It eschews the hubris of athiests who know the One Thing For Sure than no one else does.

  • We seem to be at a stalemate, as I simply do not believe in gods. Show me testable empirical evidence for a god-like being and I will concede that god-like beings exist. Until that is established, it’s fruitless to add them as variables.

  • Tracey

    I didn’t say I believe in G0d either. I’m saying as it stands, we cannot explain how the universe was born.

    Maybe it was created in another dimension that defies our mathematics, or maybe there is a sentient force behind it; who knows?

    I’m a scientific agnostic, so I don’t think it’s smart to mock people who have concluded there is a God or those who have concluded there is not. One of them is right, but we don’t know who.

  • Well, I think that the people who have reached the “god” conclusion just don’t have evidence that is up to my evidentiary standards.

    I’m not going to give them the benefit of a doubt, especially not if they use their beliefs to do things like impugn nonbelievers’ morality. If they don’t play nice, why should I?

  • TommYYman

    Strange, just had a debate with a non-Christian who thinks that people shouldnt be allowed to express their free speech by displaying a confederate flag. So I think that accusation goes both ways.