Replies

  • Thanks for posting Brett. Very informative. I've been swayed on this issue on a daily basis and there's more intelligent and qualified people than I who will determine his fate, but it's great to read an article that expresses an alternative to the standard mantra that dominates the media.

    • The interesting thing is that at no point does the writer take a side on Izzy's statements. You're left actually wondering what her views are. Should always be that way with journalists. There are a couple of supposed journos on this site that could learn from that.

      • Yes, it gets us to question society and it's behaviour in the whole issue. Which is a very pertinent point, if this had of occurred in the 70's or 80's it would have barely caused a ripple, is that good or bad who knows.

         

      • She does take a side she says she doesn’t agree with the statements. Then she says he is free to make them. Which he is. But his employer is also free to sack him for making them. Which they have. 

        • You aren’t just free to sack employees at will for posting a quote from the Bible .  It’s about time employers got a reality check when it comes to social media . I hope Falou bankrupts the ARU and sets a precedent.   

           

           

  •  So - are gay folk going to hell or not?

    Are there gay people in Heaven? 

    Im very confused with the whole thing.

    • This is something that depends on which version of the bible you are reading. Most just state that these people cannot enter the Kingdom of God (ie whilst they are sinning). It doesn't say anything about going to Hell, and that would require a total rejection of God.

      • Again, going to Hell isn’t God rejecting Man, it’s Man rejecting God. 

        Essentially Hell is eternity separated from God.

        • And If Man and everything were created in God's image, it's also Man rejecting both Man's and reality's essential nature.

        • tumblr_p9jx32Xduh1w29u9yo1_400.jpg

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

CarloEEL2 replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Corporate box for Arthur and Gladys for life I say "
7 seconds ago
Adam Magrath replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Sets the tone for the season ahead doesn't it."
11 seconds ago
iamnot replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"on the basis that, if proven, Melbourne were footing thye legal bills of Lomax, a player not contracted to them. "
3 minutes ago
CarloEEL2 replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Sucks to have an SC who's a die hard Parra fan 😆😆😆😆🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻"
3 minutes ago
macybrown replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Agree with you LB. If he has a case for medical retirement, which seems so, can't we just persue that now? Win/win."
5 minutes ago
Poppa replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"On what basis "iam".....legal costs do not reflect on players remuneration.
PS My guess is Arthur Moses would have charged Parra no where near that, but is happy to get paid top price with Storm footing the bill......that 250k is for Moses, not…"
7 minutes ago
LB replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"That would make no sense to offload him since we get more money just retiring him medically."
9 minutes ago
macybrown replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Haha! Fizzer 
 "
9 minutes ago
wally replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"fantastic result . great to see the storm stopped , for too long they have had things go their way. a win for the eels and the entire league"
10 minutes ago
Phil Mann replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"More like a sparkler"
10 minutes ago
Bourbon Man replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Isn't that devastating for Matterson!
The Eels would only release Lomax if they "obtained benefit to their football program" and the DT are reporting that had Matterson gone to the Storm, they would have released Lomax immediately!
In other words,…"
10 minutes ago
macybrown replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Hahaha! Blew back"
11 minutes ago
Phil Mann replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"How'd that blowtorch work out Tripp???"
13 minutes ago
Nightmare Off-Season replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"Exactly, MeelK. 100% agree. Which could also be protection against the NRL if they plan to try and get some sort of payback.
What a sensational win by the Eels this is. Stoked we didn't fold an accept financial compensation & a player not worthy of…"
15 minutes ago
macybrown replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"This would seriously be one of the best bit of news we've received as parra fans imo! Fifteen other clubs to talk turkey with Zac and eventually there's gonna be one we give our written approval to exit to! ...we are not unreasonable just play…"
16 minutes ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Muttman's discussion Eels win in the Supreme Court
"We should now take the opportunity to work with Lomax's agent and other teams round the league to get him a deal done Wheather it takes a third team to get him down to Melbourne or a straight swap with someone else.It'll be interesting to see if the…"
17 minutes ago
More…

 

Eels win in the Supreme Court

Summary:Zac Lomax has settled his legal dispute with the Parramatta Eels, agreeing he cannot return to the NRL without the club’s written consent before the 2028 season.In a surprise development in the NSW Supreme Court, both parties reached a…

Read more…
53 Replies · Reply by CarloEEL2 8 seconds ago
Views: 988

What's the Iongi Update?

Does anyone else find it weird that the chat on Iongi has gone very quiet? We've heard nothing from the NRL or the club directly, only through newspaper articles.May it be because the NRL don't see it as much of a serious issue? What do we think?…

Read more…
5 Replies · Reply by Acme 17 hours ago
Views: 1126

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>