As we all know, the PC Left consistently use sneaky tactics to achieve their goals. One of their faves is to choose a seemingly oppressed minority and falsely claim that the group they wanna slime are being big bad meanies to them. This is the primary ploy they use to attack Folau.
If you don't do your own thinking -- and sadly that is the case with a lot of people these days because of the dumbing down of education resulting from the PC Left's corruption of it -- then it might appear the accusation levelled at the rugby player is accurate. The Instagram post that set the whole firestorm off does say that homosexuals are going to hell, after all ...
But while the list was short, it was extremely comprehensive. According to devout Christians atheists and idolators alone make up the vast majority of the world's population. Hardly discriminatory, it was actually highly, er, inclusive.
So this idea that Israel was singling out or targeting gays is absolute bollocks. So too was the idea that he was being hateful. (If you hate people you wouldn't wanna save them, right?) But of course the usual suspects were repeating this line ad nauseam.
Notice how Phelps fudges the issue by calling the stoush a "contractual dispute", zif it had nothing to do with Folau's religious beliefs. Gawd ... There are many Muslim sports stars who have a harsher view of the gay lifestyle than the Christian rugby player yet they haven't come a cropper in this way. Anthony Mundine is an obvious example.
Pirate Pete was true to form as he joined the pile on to kick another worshipper of "Big Sky Daddy". But it was interesting that such a high profile atheist didn't cast himself as a victim of Folau's post. And that was because he so obviously wasn't. How could you be upset about someone saying you'll be going to a place you don't even believe exists? Also, it would've looked completely ridiculous if such a thick skinned ol' lummox (and a former rugby player himself) claimed his pwecious wittle fee-fees were hurt.
So, rather than tackle Folau honestly, like he would've done on the field, and say he was driven by disdain for his religion specifically, he had to make it look like he was being all compassionate and caring. FFS, what a fake!
So, he was implying that Folau's post could've contributed to suicide. That is such an absurd claim. Has there ever been a confirmed case in which some tormented whippersnapper offed himself because of something a sports star he admired said ... and about religion?
Even if there is a case to be made that the online brain farts of famous rugby players and the like exacerbate closeted kids' torment, the sensible response is to advise them to ignore such posts. (That adage about sticks and stones versus words comes to mind here.) Surely it would be best to say something along the lines of: "He's a rugby player, not a life coach. Respect his skills on the field, sure. But don't worry about the other things he says. He's talking utter BS!"
This is such an obvious solution to this so-called massive problem that even Father Flog himself endorsed it.
You know you're using a truly stupid argument when this shameless virtue signaller debunks it. Talk about a sign from, er, Rod!
And not only is Pirate Pete's argument idiotic, it's also likely to cause more harm than what it condemns. Rather than encouraging the confused, impressionable yoof to stop sweating the small (and silly) stuff and taking charge of their own emotions, it actually implies that they should cede control of them to their idols. To use a fave leftie term it's extremely disempowering.
To be honest, I think this might even be the intention of many of those who use it -- though that's unlikely in Fitzsimons' case because I doubt he's that diabolical. It suits the agenda of the most zealous and influential rainbow fascists that young gay kids are miserable even to the point of suicide because they can use this sad state of affairs to slime their number one target: Christianity and those who practise it. And that's not just wrongheaded but deeply sinister.
More thoughts on the Folau saga, and why he's received so much support from the normies below.
Back in the 60s and 70s the satirists and comedians would have had fun with Folau's tweet. The left would do themselves a favour if they could return to that strategy. They've yet to realise how they are building the support base of Folau or any of their other targets with their scorched earth approach. Oh, well, pass the popcorn...
ReplyDelete