LGBTQ+ inclusion and Religion Debate in Football
- Thread starter SilentWitness
- Start date
There is no doubt a lot of wars were due to religion, but the majority is not religious throughout history.
The overall point about religion and war is that it's a constant point of rabble rousing. It can be used to mobilise in defence like Ireland or it can be used to persecute. It seems to be the ultimate tribal bond.
Rebellion in Ireland didn't become a popular moment until it was made about Religion.
Also to get it straight. The campaign is not to promote LGBQT, like it’s something that someone can just switch to. It’s promoting first and foremost the acceptance of these sexualities.
But we agree still far too much? So the point stands.
why does this always happen to me..?
Bizarre take. Where the hell have you pulled that from
Jordan Peterson fan.
Yes, all war is too much, even 1 life.
Unfortunately, that is the root for many people. The idea that you can choose your sexuality. Religion is a choice. Sexuality is not.
I think that it's a bit more complex than that.
It's largely based on Greek and Roman cultural values (it is worth to remember that these two civilizations were polytheistic), with a few elements from the rest of Europe, toppled with a late and largely sanitized christian flavor. Theres also a notable contribution of the Islamic culture as well in terms of science, philosophy, arts.
Christianism and Judaism are as intolerant as Islam when dogmatically interpretated. There's still plenty of examples to this day to prove it. Just look at the some parts in the US, Eastern Europe, Asia, or Israel and the worrying global rise of the far-right which isn't exactly a fan of the LGBTQ+.
Any religion is open to interpretation, especially when it comes in millenia olds writings born out of very specific local circumstances and where the societal norms were radically different.
In the case of Islam, I think that the generally lower educational level of the populations which mostly live under authoritarian regimes, don't come often in contact with people from other countries with different views and have a hard time travelling abroad (visas, weak currency, etc). Their regimes use religion as a political instrument of power and an essential element of identity. All of this is more responsible for the extremely conservative positions on certain topics, LGBTQ+ being one, rather than the religion in itself.
When you add to that most arab and muslim countries are less than a century old as independent entities, you start to understand why there's such a discrepancy between their views and yours, and how long the path they have ahead is.
Last edited:
Religion is a tribal bond but I reckon the desire to form tribes transcends religion. And the tribes we seem to want to form in a post religious society may end up even more problematic.
Religion is historically responsible for a lot of undeniably bad shit but there's stuff in there which is quite important, in terms of providing a moral code, bonding communities, providing for the sick and poor and even just helping people cope with existential dread.!
If it can just get past the nasty, old-fashioned stuff (basically everything to do with sex) then religion is still probably a net benefit for society. Many religions are moving in that direction. Not all, evidently.
It’s such a shame that this even needs to be said.
Eh, Bayern seemed to have much bigger issues with his support for Palestinians than any kind of homophobia, which was very German of them.
Might have been wrong about Mido.
Kanoute refused to wear a betting sponsor and was given a blank shirt. Although I think he relented after a while. Papisse Cisse refused to wear the Newcastle Wonga shirt. He also relented after a while.
On the other side, Real Madrid removed a cross from their shirt for some UAE deal. The PL stopped giving alcoholic champagne as MOTM awards around 2011/2012, partly because Muslim players were refusing fo accept the award.
There's been concessions on both sides.
But, in terms of their faith, there must be a distinct difference between commercial responsibility based on a contract and supporting social causes. Which players aren't contractually obliged to wear.
Partly. His homophobia was also likely part of it. These things aren’t exclusive.
Aye the infusion of tribal with religion has been historically very explosive.
His behavior of supporting Palestine you mean right
Do you think it was part reason he was sold?
If both United and Mazraoui knew that this would eventually become a problem when playing in England, then it should have been resolved earlier.
Dont put him, or the club, into this situation.
I agree with you, but there had already been friction between him and the club before that. Bayern's ultras are rather left-leaning (1860 is the "conservative" club in Munich) and rainbow flags are a permanent feature of the Ultra stand. Bayern and St Pauli fans, for example, had a joint choreo at the game in Hamburg.
@bosnian_red @That_Bloke
Good to see the team show some togetherness.
Quality control
So should we sold Mazraoui now since Crafton report saying him don't want to wear jacket with some rainbow in it? Beside Mazraoui, who else do we think maybe having the same thought or beliefs as him? Amad maybe? If we don't sold them now, next year same shite will happen again. Surely we don't want Adam Crafton to write the same report again next year aren't we? And to prevent that from ever happen again, maybe the club should just outright ban any future players with the said beliefs. I mean its the only logical steps. Like diabetes, just better to cut them off legs from letting it spread.
In fact why not go bigger than that. Any person with the said belief shouldn't be in any western society. That should be the way moving forward right?
/s
In fact why not go bigger than that. Any person with the said belief shouldn't be in any western society. That should be the way moving forward right?
/s
He wants putting in a cage
I can't believe Solius blames jewish people for world war 2.
I can think of another, better, way forward.
Got Maz in my FPL Team. Don't worry I've stuck the rainbow laces on my kit design.
Kind of feel the club (or team) have put themselves in this situation personally. He doesn't want to wear the logo, fine, whatever, that's his choice and people can make their own judgement on him as a person based on that. Why they thought it would then be a good idea for everyone to not wear it is baffling to me. You want to show solidarity with someone's intolerance towards others sexuality? Bizarre.
Kind of feel the club (or team) have put themselves in this situation personally. He doesn't want to wear the logo, fine, whatever, that's his choice and people can make their own judgement on him as a person based on that. Why they thought it would then be a good idea for everyone to not wear it is baffling to me. You want to show solidarity with someone's intolerance towards others sexuality? Bizarre.
That's it. That's what Mazraoui and others are refusing to support.
And yes, it's actively refusing. These people are expected by their clubs and the FA to do something and then refuse. That's quite different from the workplace examples someone referenced.
During Bayern’s game against RB Leipzig on Saturday, fans of the Bavarian team unveiled a banner reading “All colors are beautiful. In Toulouse, Munich and everywhere. Respect our values, Mazraoui.
Well done Bayern fans!
Well done Bayern fans!
Couldn't have been handled much worse by the club really could it. It's fairly normal for companies to avoid putting employees in a situation like this.
It feels fairly obvious that clubs should have just their captain and vice captain acting as representatives. That way you can ensure the appearance of unity at least.
I've certainly no sympathy for Maz though he's made a statement with his actions here and he'll have to deal with the consequences.
It feels fairly obvious that clubs should have just their captain and vice captain acting as representatives. That way you can ensure the appearance of unity at least.
I've certainly no sympathy for Maz though he's made a statement with his actions here and he'll have to deal with the consequences.
I can't understand why someone would have an issue with who someone wants to sleep with (ofcourse unless there is harm involved). Though I'm not religious now, even when I did still believe in God I didn't have an issue with homosexuals, so it's not necessarily that I believe religious people should still be against gay lifestyles.
That being said, especially after recent world events, I'm always uncomfortable with these statements being made in football and the need to be politically active when you consider how certain other statements are not allowed for political/economic reasons.
I just don't like it when players are forced to make statements on some issues, and vilified if they don't, but then aren't allowed to make them for issues that they feel close to political/economic reasons.
That being said, especially after recent world events, I'm always uncomfortable with these statements being made in football and the need to be politically active when you consider how certain other statements are not allowed for political/economic reasons.
I just don't like it when players are forced to make statements on some issues, and vilified if they don't, but then aren't allowed to make them for issues that they feel close to political/economic reasons.
I don't share Mazraoui's views and would be the last to defend them, but living in Germany and having witnessed the general hysteria about Gaza, I'm personally certain that it's his support for Palestine that played the decisive role in your club selling him.
all colors are beautiful, except brownI thought the real reason Bayern sold him was because he was not OK with zionists murdering children and wearing the clothes of the mothers they had just killed as well, while posing for selfies. And that, like much of Germany, Bayern catered to the whims of a zionist cult hellbent on killing as many as possible. And not being OK with someone not being OK with that is probably an infinitely worse look than him opting not to wear this jacket (which I am not applauding on his part or excusing, just interested in this newly developed narrative by Bayern fans)
If Bayern supporters can correct this, a follow up question: Is it OK for a sports persons in Germany to not be OK with a cult killing babies?
If Bayern supporters can correct this, a follow up question: Is it OK for a sports persons in Germany to not be OK with a cult killing babies?
Because only him not wearing it creates an even bigger issue. I don't think it is a case of showing solidarity with him or his beliefs, it would be more a case of not wanting him to be singled out.
With his history and beliefs, this should have been avoided months in advance. Find another way for club to support the LBGTQ community.
You underestimate our fanbase. Which doesn’t mean that it didn’t play a part. It did. Certainly. But the way you and others are brushing the outrage over his homophobia aside, shows that you lack understanding of the clubs fan culture.
What is that supposed to mean?
Munich sold him because he voiced his support for Palestine.
Which if the main reason is incredibly dumb.
Didn't hear anything like this from Bayern fans about the genocide of brown people