LGBTQ+ inclusion and Religion Debate in Football
- Thread starter SilentWitness
- Start date
Bruno is still wearing the armband though
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,828
- Supports
️
I said Nazism was veering off topic.
Pointing out the flaw in your ignorance of the possible comparison wasn’t.
You're very bad at sarcasm, you should practice more.
Obviously what was meant, as you very well understand, is that follow-up questions should be asked about why he only writes that phrase when he's wearing a rainbow armband. If it's simply a message of truth and love and inclusivity, and has nothing to do with the armband, then that would be quite the coincidence.
The people moaning about taking the knee were also scum.
Yeah I'm not sure - either they know more than us, or they're inferring that part. Or maybe it's just badly worded, and they reiterate that his refusal meant that the other players felt like they should do the same so as not to single him out.
It's explained in the statement, did you not read it? According to Rainbow Devils, the squad wanted to participate, but because Mazraoui didn't, he put them in a position where they had to choose between doing the supportive event with the obvious glaring image of Mazraoui not joining in, or alternatively dropping the whole thing to not show division. They chose the latter.
the whole argument about the rest of the squad doing this so Maz wouldn't feel or look bad is hilarious.
he's not some 14 old kid in need of support. he singled out himself, he's perfectly fine where he is.
Idrissa did the same at PSG and avoided playing in rainbow kits. he certainly wasn't crying outside the stadium, if anything he was delighted after they finally stopped asking him to do it.
he's not some 14 old kid in need of support. he singled out himself, he's perfectly fine where he is.
Idrissa did the same at PSG and avoided playing in rainbow kits. he certainly wasn't crying outside the stadium, if anything he was delighted after they finally stopped asking him to do it.
I read the statement, but Mazraoui saying he won't wear something is not the same as him making the rest of the squad not wear something. He made a choice, as did the rest of the squad.
Mazraoui made a personal decision, and the squad chose to support him in it. That's an active decision by others, not Mazraoui imo
Yes, that's what "put the squad in a position" means. If he made the squad do it, then they'd have no decision to make.
"he put the rest of the squad into a position where they felt that they couldn’t wear their jackets"
Fair enough, it's more the second part of the sentence I disagree with. Mazraoui not wearing a jacket doesn't reasonably mean the players couldn't. And if the players felt that they couldn't, that is not a reasonable feeling, in my view.
@Iker Quesadillas - so you've been doing this a lot in the last couple of pages: selectively picking and choosing the posts you respond (not the ones that properly rebut your arguments), and misinterpreting posts to suit your argument. It can happen once or twice of course, but it's been often enough to be a pattern now. Can I ask why? Cause it's frustrating.
That's just you ignoring context to twist what is being said. They didn't feel like they literally couldn't wear the jackets, or that Mazraoui was somehow forcing them, but that them all wearing the jacket while he didn't would look terrible, so they felt like that wasn't the right choice.
This is all extremely obvious.
I don't think it would look terrible. I think it would look like a show of support with one holdout - probably attract more censure to Mazraoui but he knows he's signed up for that.
Fair enough if you think I'm ignoring context - I think that you are exaggerating/distorting the context.
because Quran says so?
Which is obviously what the team wanted to avoid, though they probably hoped people wouldn't find out that they dropped it. Maybe they would have chosen differently if they knew the choice was between all except Mazraoui participating, vs everyone knowing they all chose not to. We'll never know.
Wrong thread.
I was going to respond to your post but I was distracted by the Real Madrid game. Other posts, I might have not seen; the thread moves fast.
As for misinterpreting posts to suit my argument. I don't think that is what I'm doing. BenitoStarr posted that "the anice is veering off topic." By 'anice' he meant 'Nazism.' I did not misinterpret that to suit my argument, I misinterpreted that because the spelling is quite off from the actual word.
Last edited:
Well, okay then.
The misinterpretation was also just due to your partial quote though. The full sentence was 'The anice is veering off topic but can anyone tell me with a straight face or explain how Islam isn’t homophobic?' I think being in this thread, it's pretty clear the 'off-topic' bit doesn't refer to the second half of the sentence.
Anyway, I'll leave it there.
Fairytalists selfishly fecking up an inclusionary event yet again. Embarrassing in this day & age.
Team should have worn the jackets.
Leave Maz in the dressing room until the start of the game or let him choose to not wear it
Like the NFL did with the anthem protests
Leave Maz in the dressing room until the start of the game or let him choose to not wear it
Like the NFL did with the anthem protests
If you read back I am talking about beliefs not about what people can and cannot say, or can and cannot act, that is why there are laws about hate speech and rightly so, I am trying to point out the hypocrisy of damning somebody for having a religious belief no matter how much I personally disagree with that belief
In a squad of 20+ players one guy says I don't want to wear this isn't putting them in a position to have to choose. That's not counting the manager and the coaches.
Everyone focussing in Maz I suggest people have a look at the other 20+ and manager, coaches, owners etc.
I would even go as far as argue that there is no will or want to support this gesture from the club. I'm sure I read a few years back that UTD never participate in certain rainbow related things because of how they are set up or something. This is in part why they did the whole Rainbow devils thing. To separate from the first team. (I may have some of the finer details wrong here but isn't this why we didn't do rainbow laces a while back?)
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,828
- Supports
- ️
It’s not hypocritical being critical of someone holding homophobic views. When as others have pointed out they hold Islamic views without the homophobia.
Nobody has any issue with someone having a religion. The issue is very specific to the homophobia that a person can choose to combat or defend.
I don't understand the uproar. It's another token gesture that means feck all other than to virtue signal.
Again I am talking about beliefs, billions of people around the world believe homosexuality is wrong, I personally think that is utter bollocks, I absolutely abhor it, but I will also defend their right to believe what they want to believe.
I cannot say my beliefs are correct, your beliefs are correct, or their beliefs are wrong, beliefs are personal and no matter what I think about them or you think about them you cannot say they are wrong only that you think they are wrong, nor can you even begin to police peoples beliefs.
Actions are different, very different, and we should live in a society where people are not allowed to negatively impact on others by putting their beliefs into action, nor should they be able to promote their hatred through speech, however religious freedom means that these abhorrent views (in my opinion) can be heard and promoted and passed on like a virus, and it is not limited to homosexuality.
Look I am about the most liberal minded person you will ever meet, I absolutely loath inequality and have tried to live my life in a way that propagates that, but trying to stifle what somebody wants to believe is just about the worst thing we could ever do, I am pro educating people to open their minds and hearts and not judge anyone for their lifestyle, choice, genetics or anything else as long as everyone is happy what you do with your genitals is your business.
Having a freedom to believe what you want without fear of persecution, is cornerstone of a free democratic society, you disagree with the belief that homosexuals are an affront to god, I disagree too, but what next, and what after that, you cannot start telling people what they are allowed to believe, it is a dangerous and slippery slope.
The uproar is that united is involved. There's been much less noise about a certain Arsenal midfielder's misadventures for example, which is a more severe matter.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,828
- Supports
- ️
If only we were party to who you were referring to.
Without trying to oppress you, and I'm terribly sorry if me asking you this is causing you comparable pain to people being enslaved due to the color of their skin or burned alive because of their sexuality, can you explain how disagreeing with someone's homophobic beliefs are hypocritical, even if those beliefs have religious origins? If you want to, you can also explain what you mean by "damned".
So you are saying that somebody is not allowed to believe that homosexuality is wrong? I mean I think they are wrong, but how dare you tell them they cannot believe that, what actually gives you the right? because you think you are right? I just don't understand how people cannot see that even with something like this telling somebody they are not allowed to believe something is horrific, and more over is not going to have any positive effect if anything it will have a negative impact.
And just playing devils advocate, they could well be correct, you don't know, I don't know, nobody does because there is zero evidence to support or refute religious beliefs, as I say my opinion is that it is a terrible way to think, it doesn't mean that someday I will not burn in a fiery pit! for my very many sins!
This is extremely dumb. There has been much more noise about Morsy and Guehi.
It isn't causing me pain, I do not oppose you disagreeing with somebodies beliefs at all, I disagree with those beliefs, I abhor those beliefs, I disagree with anyone telling somebody they are not allowed to believe what they want however distasteful it is, and again I am only talking about personal beliefs not any actions or speech that results from a belief.
By damning I mean that "you" are extremely critical of somebody for having a belief different to your own, and my own for that matter,
This whole debate is orwellian.
On one side, Islam's treatment of LGBT people is atrocious. On the other, Mazraoui may simply feel uncomfortable bringing himself into heat with his co-believers by wearing that jacket. It's not an indictment that he's a bigot, but the "YOU WILL WEAR THE JACKET OTHERWISE YOU HATE US" stance is totalitarian.
On one side, Islam's treatment of LGBT people is atrocious. On the other, Mazraoui may simply feel uncomfortable bringing himself into heat with his co-believers by wearing that jacket. It's not an indictment that he's a bigot, but the "YOU WILL WEAR THE JACKET OTHERWISE YOU HATE US" stance is totalitarian.
You also enjoy lying! No one has said anything of the sort, and you know that.
I'm, as you're aware, referring to the fact that you're calling people being critical oppressors, and that you think the criticism is as bad as bigotry itself. Actual oppression is like the things I mentioned. So don't hide away from the things you've stated again and again and again. Stand for something! Presumably you don't like oppression, so speak up against the oppressors.
For comparison, on r/soccer:
Guehi
3 threads, 2.8k comments total, in 3 days
Mazraoui
2 threads, 3.8k comments in 1 day
Morsy
1 thread, 1.2k comments in 2 days
I am not lying at all and I am sorry if I have offended you
Telling somebody they cannot believe something is oppression, there is no way around it.
Religious and political oppression is just a damaging to society as any other form of oppression, in fact it leads to some of the worst atrocities we have seen in history.
And I am not saying you shouldn't oppose, challenge, criticise or see to educate somebody who holds a view you disagree with,, I am purely saying that ostracising somebody for having a belief is hypocritical, if they have not done harm to another person in furtherance of that belief.
Yes, obviously more people are going to click and comment about a player on one of the biggest clubs in the world. These numbers are a slam dunk against your claim, when are nobodies like Palace and Ipswich players ever pulling comparable attention to a United player?
So if somebody believed paedophilia was acceptable you would defend their right to believe it and would not say their beliefs were incorrect, even if you thought they were incorrect?
Why do you place such importance on people being allowed to believe whatever they want? That isn't how any societies work. There's plenty of abhorrent things people, rightfully, are told they can't/shouldn't believe in.
You're not capable of offending me, don't worry. You are, however, oppressing me! You're telling me I cannot criticize Mazraoui, which means that you are trying to inflict another Holocaust.
If you're incapable of understanding that I don't mean the last two sentences, or what I actually mean by them, then I don't know what to say.
Maybe logic is not your strong suit, but you said the other two cases had more noise, when in fact they didn't. Perhaps you meant they had more noise in relation to the stature of the clubs the other players involved in the other controversies, but that's not what you said, and frankly the fact that you even double down on this is what is actually dumb.