Current Affairs LGBTQ Good Religion Bad - discuss

[Pittsburgh Footy]

There are levels to these arguments.

I disagree with Gana's insistence on not wearing the rainbow stuff due to "religion". But I can forgive him as that's all he did, not wear it. He also seems by all accounts to be a quality human being.

Guehi, who I haven't heard anything about good or bad prior to this, definitely upped the ante by wearing the rainbow and making a specific statement meant to show his scorn for it by his messaging.

Guehi could have chosen to go Gana's route. He did not.

So he deserves the controversy, as he brought this on himself, to no surprise to him. It's specifically what he wanted by making the statement - surely he knew he was picking a fight.

 

[Kever10]

There are levels to these arguments.

I disagree with Gana's insistence on not wearing the rainbow stuff due to "religion". But I can forgive him as that's all he did, not wear it. He also seems by all accounts to be a quality human being.

Guehi, who I haven't heard anything about good or bad prior to this, definitely upped the ante by wearing the rainbow and making a specific statement meant to show his scorn for it by his messaging.

Guehi could have chosen to go Gana's route. He did not.

So he deserves the controversy, as he brought this on himself, to no surprise to him. It's specifically what he wanted by making the statement - surely he knew he was picking a fight.

How is wearing it with a message, not a hateful message mind, worse than not wearing it?

Also, who publicised it? Him or the FA/Media?

 

[Bryan+]

I understand the need for these initiatives but it’s a bit off that Guehi and Morsy are now big news stories for following their beliefs whilst doing their job. If you do not wish to openly support an initiative it doesn’t necessarily mean you are wrong

I really don’t understand if Guehi is homophobic or not since this message basically tells me as a man he’s expressing his love for another man.

What does that make him?

 

[Sean Ashley]

I really don’t understand if Guehi is homophobic or not since this message basically tells me as a man he’s expressing his love for another man.

What does that make him?

A nice bit of devil's advocate

Without a statement which he won't give. Then we can't say all we can do is interpret. But making these statement in consecutive matches is clearly something he doesn't have to do and can be judged according based on them actions.

If he loves Jesus so much, do a Pienaar and put it under his shirt.

 

[Rita_Poon]

Oh dear, someone demanding someone else do something. Probably a troll of a football player as well.

Ahh, the freedom of the ignore list.

 

[Bishop Thumpety-Thump]

Personally myself i feel we do want people who identify as LGBT to feel safe and welcome at a football match.

So i think anyone who has a problem with these sort of things and initiatives, well it reflects kind of poorly on them imo.

Pity you don’t want Palestinian children to be safe as well.

 

[wandyr79]

How is wearing it with a message, not a hateful message mind, worse than not wearing it?

Also, who publicised it? Him or the FA/Media?

That is a good question. If the media ignored it maybe nobody would bat an eyelid. However, Guehi has to be a level of stupid that is off the charts to sit there and write this on the armband, while thinking nobody will see any hidden implication in the messaging.

He may have meant it it in a 'Jesus loves all' kind of way but, as mentioned, it was always going to be seen by some as inflammatory, given that there is a large enough percentage of society that are homophobes and a lot of that is down to religious beliefs.

If he hadn't worn it, or another player was made captain, it would have been a 5 second commentary at most. I have only seen him having to make a statement, not the Ipswich player, who I believe just didn't wear it.

 

[Kever10]

That is a good question. If the media ignored it maybe nobody would bat an eyelid. However, Guehi has to be a level of stupid that is off the charts to sit there and write this on the armband, while thinking nobody will see any hidden implication in the messaging.

He may have meant it it in a 'Jesus loves all' kind of way but, as mentioned, it was always going to be seen by some as inflammatory, given that there is a large enough percentage of society that are homophobes and a lot of that is down to religious beliefs.

If he hadn't worn it, or another player was made captain, it would have been a 5 second commentary at most. I have only seen him having to make a statement, not the Ipswich player, who I believe just didn't wear it.

He had to make a statement because he was reprimanded. And he was reprimanded for writing on the arm band, which he was, essentially, coerced into wearing as a publicity stunt.

I went to the game last night and seeing as i sit in the top balcony, i couldnt tell you who did or who didn't wear the laces, but it was advertised at the start with a giant rainbow laces flag, and an introduction by the announcer to say that it was rainbow laces day. If the PL insist on promoting it, why can they not simply do this at the beginning of the game, as they did, or use a rainbow ball, as ive suggested, rather than making it a personal issue by forcing the virtue signalling on individuals across the board?

 

[Rita_Poon]

go away knob end.

 

[wandyr79]

He had to make a statement because he was reprimanded. And he was reprimanded for writing on the arm band, which he was, essentially, coerced into wearing as a publicity stunt.

I went to the game last night and seeing as i sit in the top balcony, i couldnt tell you who did or who didn't wear the laces, but it was advertised at the start with a giant rainbow laces flag, and an introduction by the announcer to say that it was rainbow laces day. If the PL insist on promoting it, why can they not simply do this at the beginning of the game, as they did, or use a rainbow ball, as ive suggested, rather than making it a personal issue by forcing the virtue signalling on individuals across the board?

Nobody was coerced into it. If they were then the Ipswich player would have had also been reprimanded.

He could have taken the obvious and easy option that every other player had the right to do and not wear it, he could have been up front with the manager and club and come to an agreement that the vice captain wore it for one game. No, he took the route to write on it, not only that but with a message that the Premier League and FA have already said is not allowed, regardless of whether it is the rainbow armband or not.

He must have known the consequences of the action, it is not exactly a secret that homophobia is rife in the organised religious community. If he had brains he would have just opted out, which was his right.

For me the 'how' does not matter when promoting inclusivity (obviously, sometimes it can go a bit too far, just the same as some of the poppy displays, etc.). The message counts, that is all. Does it really matter if it is a ball, an armband, laces or just a message. It is not like they are asking players to perform sex acts on the pitch in the name of inclusivity. These are all small harmless highlighting tools that they can use and hopefully people can see past the 'how' and just see the message and maybe, just maybe, it might make a few people think about that message.

 

[Kever10]

go away knob end.

Go and Cope in the Trump thread you helmet.

 

[Kever10]

Nobody was coerced into it. If they were then the Ipswich player would have had also been reprimanded.

He could have taken the obvious and easy option that every other player had the right to do and not wear it, he could have been up front with the manager and club and come to an agreement that the vice captain wore it for one game. No, he took the route to write on it, not only that but with a message that the Premier League and FA have already said is not allowed, regardless of whether it is the rainbow armband or not.

He must have known the consequences of the action, it is not exactly a secret that homophobia is rife in the organised religious community. If he had brains he would have just opted out, which was his right.

For me the 'how' does not matter when promoting inclusivity (obviously, sometimes it can go a bit too far, just the same as some of the poppy displays, etc.). The message counts, that is all. Does it really matter if it is a ball, an armband, laces or just a message. It is not like they are asking players to perform sex acts on the pitch in the name of inclusivity. These are all small harmless highlighting tools that they can use and hopefully people can see past the 'how' and just see the message and maybe, just maybe, it might make a few people think about that message.

The coercion is implied. Do it, or you will be made an example of in the media. Most people, regardless of beliefs, won't want to rock the boat so will comply. The fact he was reprimanded only proves it. If someone had written the names or initials of LGBTQ friends or family on the armband, would they have been held to account? No. But he wrote "Jesus you" and was criticised for it. It wasnt hate speech.

The armbands is virtue signalling. It should be reserved for captains and a a mark of respect when mourning a death.

If they want to introduce a campaign, do it in such a way that doesnt exclude or make an example of someone, which is ironically the message they are trying to get across in the 1st place.

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

Pity you don’t want Palestinian children to be safe as well.

This! He is a rat

 

[Walken]

Wore the Chang jersey as well

View attachment 284547

Very much this, it appears that minority groups offend ones religious beliefs more than huge well paying corporations

 

[Walken]

It isn't at all.

You can claim it is but unless you can justify that he was writing his message on the rainbow armband for that reason I'm going to call it bollocks.

Why has he never written his profession of love on a regular black armband? Get in the bin with this.

Bet you some of his best friends are gay christians (their opinions will also suit his argument to a tee)