NRL Teams Manly-Warringah Sea Eagles

[Tragic]

I been trying to get that bushshirt for ages, L and XL ran out quick as. Its ugly is what makes it so beautiful.

 

[drunk_monk]

Thanks for the clarification. Culture always changes and society of the day decides what stays and what doesn't.

Culture changed for every group during colonisation and that was at snail pace compared to the effect the internet has. And people dont even have to leave home to do it. No wonder everyone harks back to the good old days.

Anyway, most of the comments on here only serve to widen the gaps between groups. Threatening, banning, excluding players because of their religious beliefs is no different from the poor way the rainbow community has been treated.

To be super clear. The players were asked to symbolise inclusion and they said no. They would rather not play than support inclusion.

Anyone (like me) suggesting that they can piss off are not saying they should be excluded for their views, religion or anything else like that.

We are saying if they want to exclude people they should not take part.

I have made this point before and i will make it again.

If you are settling the bar for inclusion is to include the views of the people against inclusion then you are saying if is impossible to be inclusive.

I disagree. Inclusion is very possible. You start with inclusion and anyone who doesnt want to take part because they don't want a symbol of inclusion does not have to take part.

They can believe whatever the fuck they want but the only requirements is to not do anything that excludes people.

They can be included if they have awful views about people as long as they don't act on their awful views.

People suggesting that players who don't want inclusion should be sacked are not being too mean to the players opposing inclusion is not being anti-inclusion.

They can believe whatever the fuck they want so long as they don't do things like opposing inclusion and make gay people feel unwelcome.

 

[JaggedJ]

Surely at some point one of our 16,749 jerseys was basically a rainbow one anyway

 

[drunk_monk]

Surely at some point one of our 16,749 jerseys was basically a rainbow one anyway

You'd think so but since 167,44 them are black or grey it's drops those odds a surprising amount.

 

[drunk_monk]

Sheit with so many posts in the Manly thread this week you would think there would be more action in the Round 20 discussion thread when the game was on!

General - NRL 2022 Round 20 - General Discussion

NRL 2022 Round 20 - General Discussion A thread for all 2022 Round 20 team lists, discussions, news and views. Serves as a team list thread and game day discussion for all games through the week (besides the Warriors one of course :) )...

nzwarriors.com

 

[Geoff Public]

To be super clear. The players were asked to symbolise inclusion and they said no. They would rather not play than support inclusion.

Anyone (like me) suggesting that they can piss off are not saying they should be excluded for their views, religion or anything else like that.

We are saying if they want to exclude people they should not take part.

I have made this point before and i will make it again.

If you are settling the bar for inclusion is to include the views of the people against inclusion then you are saying if is impossible to be inclusive.

I disagree. Inclusion is very possible. You start with inclusion and anyone who doesnt want to take part because they don't want a symbol of inclusion does not have to take part.

They can believe whatever the fuck they want but the only requirements is to not do anything that excludes people.

They can be included if they have awful views about people as long as they don't act on their awful views.

People suggesting that players who don't want inclusion should be sacked are not being too mean to the players opposing inclusion is not being anti-inclusion.

They can believe whatever the fuck they want so long as they don't do things like opposing inclusion and make gay people feel unwelcome.

You're not clear. You rant like you're yelling and you emphasize it with swear words. It doesn't work for NRL coaches and it's not working for you.

Players have refused to wear a jersey. I haven’t heard anyone say they want to exclude anyone because of how they identify. Can you show me the quote where this has happened.

They view the jersey differently to you but you'll never find out how. Because everyone switches off when someone's having a rant.

 

[Sup42]

I rejected that assumption then as I do now.

If you would know who controls you see who you may not criticise - Tacitus

There's page after page on here proving it.

Dude it is the English language. Learn it.

 

[drunk_monk]

You're not clear. You rant like you're yelling and you emphasize it with swear words. It doesn't work for NRL coaches and it's not working for you.

Players have refused to wear a jersey. I haven’t heard anyone say they want to exclude anyone because of how they identify. Can you show me the quote where this has happened.

They view the jersey differently to you but you'll never find out how. Because everyone switches off when someone's having a rant.

OK fair. I suppose instead of saying to be clear, I should have said to be thorough. The issue with these discussions tends to be if you summarize a point then people latch on to half a comment and use that against you.

Just as a FYI if I was yelling I would be using caps.

And admittedly I was using swearing when supporting them having their own beliefs. I tend to use swearing when really emphasizing a point and I forget that these days some people are still upset by swearing, so if you are one of those people sorry.

But to make that point without the swearing. They can believe whatever they want and I support people believing whatever they want, so long as they don't make other people feel like they can't exist.

So to try making the point more succinctly: The jersey is called the everyone in league jersey. I view it as the everyone in league jersey. The jersey it so promote inclusiveness and allowing anybody to play.
The jersey was made to promote everyone being welcome.

The player oppose a jersey with that message. And if you disagree, well that is the jersey and that is the message, and they chose to not play. because of the jersey with that message.

I would absolutely love to read a message from the player that addresses why they oppose this message, and if it is based on their beliefs how they live by those beliefs in every other aspect of their life. The reason for the later is because people regularly use their religion to justify their bigotry because it is "against the rules" while breaking a bunch of other rules. If they are consistent and follow all the rules sweet. I don't like them standing down from the game but I can respect their stance if it is consistent.

 

[Sup42]

🤣🤣 whaaaaaat?? dude? Really? Jesus and homosexuality??

You read the Bible?

Heard of Judge mot lest ye be Judged?

Heard of turn the other cheek?

Heard of Christ himself allowing a prostitute to bathe his feet to make an example that no one is excluded from his love?

Laughing emojis just shows you don't even understand the new testament even if you have read it.

Christ went to all, even the lepers and the mad man. You just can't see the truth of his life....or the Mythology of the Bible is too complicated for many organized religions.

That's why I'm glad I'm not religious because most are too stupid to understand their own doctrine.

 

[W.A warrior]

You read the Bible?

Heard of Judge mot lest ye be Judged?

Heard of turn the other cheek?

Heard of Christ himself allowing a prostitute to bathe his feet to make an example that no one is excluded from his love?

Laughing emojis just shows you don't even understand the new testament even if you have read it.

Christ went to all, even the lepers and the mad man. You just can't see the truth of his life....or the Mythology of the Bible is too complicated for many organized religions.

That's why I'm glad I'm not religious because most are too stupid to understand their own doctrine.

Laughing Emojis aside, you are speaking on behalf of Christ now?

Mate I will back you with the Warriors back line at a pinch, humanity not so much.

Have your opinions, but trying to say most religious people are to dumb to follow their own beliefs and bestowing yourself as a Religious scholar is a tad much.

 

[Sup42]

Laughing Emojis aside, you are speaking on behalf of Christ now?

Mate I will back you with the Warriors back line at a pinch, humanity not so much.

Have your opinions, but trying to say most religious people are to dumb to follow their own beliefs and bestowing yourself as a Religious scholar is a tad much.

I'm no expert but I understand the simple phrase judge not....you don't have to be a preist.

Also Christ said it, Christ lived it. Don't need a church to twist that too....except who we say

 

[unclesteve]

First time I have supported Manly since the the final whistle of the 2011 Grand Final. So that was confusing.

Good on them for what they tried to do. Thought was there, execution was poor.

And for anyone trying to cloak their bigotry under the ruse of religion fuck you. At least be man enough to wear your bigotry on your sleeve. Own it.

 

[drunk_monk]

First time I have supported Manly since the the final whistle of the 2011 Grand Final. So that was confusing.

Good on them for what they tried to do. Thought was there, execution was poor.

And for anyone trying to cloak their bigotry under the ruse of religion fuck you. At least be man enough to wear your bigotry on your sleeve. Own it.

Given some of the players were called up last minute they did well not not lose by 40.

A full strength Warriors team easily could have.

 

[unclesteve]

Given some of the players were called up last minute they did well not not lose by 40.

A full strength Warriors team easily could have.

We would have given them a scare for 20 minutes or so....

 

[Geoff Public]

00

You read the Bible?

Heard of Judge mot lest ye be Judged?

Heard of turn the other cheek?

Heard of Christ himself allowing a prostitute to bathe his feet to make an example that no one is excluded from his love?

Laughing emojis just shows you don't even understand the new testament even if you have read it.

Christ went to all, even the lepers and the mad man. You just can't see the truth of his life....or the Mythology of the Bible is too complicated for many organized religions.

That's why I'm glad I'm not religious because most are too stupid to understand their own doctrine.

Dude, it's lucky you're here to explain not just this but the English language as well. I feel quite silly now. Not stupid for two silly , but you know what I mean.

Carry on champ.

 

[Geoff Public]

OK fair. I suppose instead of saying to be clear, I should have said to be thorough. The issue with these discussions tends to be if you summarize a point then people latch on to half a comment and use that against you.

Just as a FYI if I was yelling I would be using caps.

And admittedly I was using swearing when supporting them having their own beliefs. I tend to use swearing when really emphasizing a point and I forget that these days some people are still upset by swearing, so if you are one of those people sorry.

But to make that point without the swearing. They can believe whatever they want and I support people believing whatever they want, so long as they don't make other people feel like they can't exist.

So to try making the point more succinctly: The jersey is called the everyone in league jersey. I view it as the everyone in league jersey. The jersey it so promote inclusiveness and allowing anybody to play.
The jersey was made to promote everyone being welcome.

The player oppose a jersey with that message. And if you disagree, well that is the jersey and that is the message, and they chose to not play. because of the jersey with that message.

I would absolutely love to read a message from the player that addresses why they oppose this message, and if it is based on their beliefs how they live by those beliefs in every other aspect of their life. The reason for the later is because people regularly use their religion to justify their bigotry because it is "against the rules" while breaking a bunch of other rules. If they are consistent and follow all the rules sweet. I don't like them standing down from the game but I can respect their stance if it is consistent.

I'm all good.
I don't think making them wear something they don't want to will help. It is a support gender identity inclusiveness shirt.
Forcing them to wear it will prompt a reaction within their community that will work against what the shirt is trying to achieve. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Bring the shirt out and make it optional, do the Ian Roberts talk and give it time. Let them get to a point where they make this decision because they want to.
I understand what you mean about consistency in what the Bible says but I've never seen it happen that way. It doesn't matter what religion we focus on, how so many churches see the same text and operate so differently in interpretation and practice never fails to amaze me.

 

[J_P]

This guy I mainly follow for his funny videos but this video explains what I feel much better than I can in writing.
Btw he's a Christian Polynesian.

NatPicking on TikTok

Honestly a little scared to post this. The last couple of days has been draining - but I can only imagine how heartbreaking these conversations must be to witness for our 🌈 community literally every single day. All I'm saying is...remember that these people are our fanau, our tamariki and our...

vt.tiktok.com

Here's the original video he's referring to.

NatPicking on TikTok

2022 and here we are 🙄 #Manly #SeaEagles #Pride

vt.tiktok.com

 

[ramps]

You read the Bible?

Heard of Judge mot lest ye be Judged?

Heard of turn the other cheek?

Heard of Christ himself allowing a prostitute to bathe his feet to make an example that no one is excluded from his love?

Laughing emojis just shows you don't even understand the new testament even if you have read it.

Christ went to all, even the lepers and the mad man. You just can't see the truth of his life....or the Mythology of the Bible is too complicated for many organized religions.

That's why I'm glad I'm not religious because most are too stupid to understand their own doctrine.

Ok jesus. Take the bits you want out of context as usual. The prostitute reference you have chosen, ever heard of repenting for your sin?

And i do agree with you, some religious leaders do not preach their doctrine in the right way. Making it confusing and much more like a fairytale. Just remember, there are some leaders who can portray the bible and relate it to the life we live now.

In the hard times where u need healing from a higher source other than your perfect being, stay true to your thoughts

 

[drunk_monk]

I'm all good.
I don't think making them wear something they don't want to will help. It is a support gender identity inclusiveness shirt.
Forcing them to wear it will prompt a reaction within their community that will work against what the shirt is trying to achieve. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Bring the shirt out and make it optional, do the Ian Roberts talk and give it time. Let them get to a point where they make this decision because they want to.
I understand what you mean about consistency in what the Bible says but I've never seen it happen that way. It doesn't matter what religion we focus on, how so many churches see the same text and operate so differently in interpretation and practice never fails to amaze me.

The problem is by pandering to their bigotry is making sure that other people don't get to feel safe.

The jersey is saying LGBTQA people are safe here. If a bunch of players are going to play but refuse to wear the message because they disagree then LGBTQA people are not safe there.

So Manly have done the best of a bad situation. They have said those players are welcome to play, and welcome not to. They are included if they want to. The players don't want to be included.

Personally I would rather start with inclusivity and let people sit our if they don't like it than start with pandering to bigotry to avoid upsetting the bigots.

As you rightly pointed out the lack of consistency in their views and actions. Basically they are OK with sin, just not this one thing. Hence why it is clear its just hate of a group who were born different to them.

If they are consistent across the board then i can accept their stance a bit more. I still don't like it because its awful, but i can accept it. But they aren't. They just hate gay people and this is a consequence of it.

 

[wizards rage]

The problem is by pandering to their bigotry is making sure that other people don't get to feel safe.

The jersey is saying LGBTQA people are safe here. If a bunch of players are going to play but refuse to wear the message because they disagree then LGBTQA people are not safe there.

So Manly have done the best of a bad situation. They have said those players are welcome to play, and welcome not to. They are included if they want to. The players don't want to be included.

Personally I would rather start with inclusivity and let people sit our if they don't like it than start with pandering to bigotry to avoid upsetting the bigots.

As you rightly pointed out the lack of consistency in their views and actions. Basically they are OK with sin, just not this one thing. Hence why it is clear its just hate of a group who were born different to them.

If they are consistent across the board then i can accept their stance a bit more. I still don't like it because its awful, but i can accept it. But they aren't. They just hate gay people and this is a consequence of it.

I feel the issue is that the interpretation of the rainbow symbol has different meaning to different people.

It has been rebranded into representing ‘inclusivity of everyone’ which under your interpretation is offensive if these players don’t want in.

But their interpretation is not ‘inclusivity to everyone’ but the rainbow is specifically a representation of the LGBTQA community. They don’t want to promote something they fundamentally can’t believe in or support.

Is it ‘inclusivity for all’ or is it specifically about the LGBTQA community? These are 2 very different ideals. One is very open ended; one is very specific.

Moving the rainbow ‘brand’ to become bigger than just the LGBTQA community and into inclusivity for all has muddied what it even represents. It is pushing the boundary whereby these religious people must be included with them or not rather than supporting them or not.