Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

News of Ex Players

mightymoyes said:
Would you be happy enough if a player refused to play and didn't aplogise if a shirt had an anti racism logo on it?
Click to expand...
Why does he have to apologise to me? Anybody in this country is entitled to do whatever they want as long as it is within the laws of the land. Do i agree with the stand being taken obviously not, but the player is within their right to do what they want as we are living in a free country. I would however expect the club to take some kind of stance and censure as he has refused to play against the terms of his contract and possibly cancel the players contract (not likely in this day and age considering the transfer fees involved). I also wouldn't want him to be representing the club i support but this doesn't remove the persons right to stand up for their own beliefs as long as they stay within the law.
 
Brett Angell Delight said:
Is my autocorrect doing mad things to my posts? To be clear:

I do not dispute he can believe what he wants. I do not feel he should apologise for his beliefs.

HOWEVER

If his beliefs are that homosexuality is in any way wrong (because of religion or whatever, it’s immaterial) then he is objectively wrong. There is no grey area or nuance surrounding the issue. With that being the case, he deserves any criticism he gets for holding those beliefs.

Of course, he may have a far less despicable explanation for missing these matches in which case the whole point is moot.
Click to expand...
My point is (as you put it whether he is objectively wrong or not) that he can believe in what he wants as long as he does not step outside the laws of the country he is in. Yes he needs to and I'm sure will be criticised for his stance but thats the choice he can make because we are living in a free society. By the way for those waiting to jump on this i believe his views are something that I thought we had seen the back of many years ago but obviously not which is perhaps a sad indictment of our society.
 

Houghty19 said:
Why does he have to apologise to me? Anybody in this country is entitled to do whatever they want as long as it is within the laws of the land. Do i agree with the stand being taken obviously not, but the player is within their right to do what they want as we are living in a free country. I would however expect the club to take some kind of stance and censure as he has refused to play against the terms of his contract and possibly cancel the players contract (not likely in this day and age considering the transfer fees involved). I also wouldn't want him to be representing the club i support but this doesn't remove the persons right to stand up for their own beliefs as long as they stay within the law.
Click to expand...

Anyone holding bigoted views should be hounded out of the club.
Yes they're free to hold them views of course but they should know there is consequences and their lives should be a misery
 
mightymoyes said:
Anyone holding bigoted views should be hounded out of the club.
Yes they're free to hold them views of course but they should know there is consequences and their lives should be a misery
Click to expand...
Oh dear! Thin end of the wdege? What other views that you disagree with should result in the holder being 'hounded and their lives made a misery'? Perhaps voting for the 'wrong' political party' or supporting the 'wrong' ream. Maybe believing in the 'wrong' God or just wearing the 'wrong' clothes. It seems to me that, in some ways, you are not too dissimilar to Gueye.
 
judge said:
Oh dear! Thin end of the wdege? What other views that you disagree with should result in the holder being 'hounded and their lives made a misery'? Perhaps voting for the 'wrong' political party' or supporting the 'wrong' ream. Maybe believing in the 'wrong' God or just wearing the 'wrong' clothes. It seems to me that, in some ways, you are not too dissimilar to Gueye.
Click to expand...

These are not the same thing. You have a choice which party to vote for, team to support, religion to follow or clothes to wear. You have no control over your race or sexuality. It is a part of who you are.
 
judge said:
Oh dear! Thin end of the wdege? What other views that you disagree with should result in the holder being 'hounded and their lives made a misery'? Perhaps voting for the 'wrong' political party' or supporting the 'wrong' ream. Maybe believing in the 'wrong' God or just wearing the 'wrong' clothes. It seems to me that, in some ways, you are not too dissimilar to Gueye.
Click to expand...

are you simple minded?
 

Lobster Johnson said:
These are not the same thing. You have a choice which party to vote for, team to support, religion to follow or clothes to wear. You have no control over your race or sexuality. It is a part of who you are.
Click to expand...
mightymoyes said:
are you simple minded?
Click to expand...
Firstly, let me apologise for the inflammatory nature of my earlier post, it was out of order. As to the core discussion; Much as we (me included) disagree with Gueye's alleged views he is allowed to hold them and to state them publically (much as i'm allowed to say that i don't believe in a divine being). As long as he doesn't incite hatred/intolerance he is fine. I think that we have to be careful that we don't merely believe in the theory of tolerence but then fail to put it into practice (however aien to our own morals a view may be). It's fine to disagree with Gueye's alleged views but it's not fine to want him hounded or his life made a misery. In an attempt at diplomacy, i would ask that we consider the principle of views held that are contrary to ours (as the current topic generates strong emotions) and ask if it should be acceptable to intimidate those that hold those views into submission/denouncing them? History does not look favourably on such actions - think of the Lesbian teachers in the 1950's who were branded 'deviants' and hounded out of the education system (Damn! There goes my attempt at diplomacy!)
 
judge said:
Firstly, let me apologise for the inflammatory nature of my earlier post, it was out of order. As to the core discussion; Much as we (me included) disagree with Gueye's alleged views he is allowed to hold them and to state them publically (much as i'm allowed to say that i don't believe in a divine being). As long as he doesn't incite hatred/intolerance he is fine. I think that we have to be careful that we don't merely believe in the theory of tolerence but then fail to put it into practice (however aien to our own morals a view may be). It's fine to disagree with Gueye's alleged views but it's not fine to want him hounded or his life made a misery. In an attempt at diplomacy, i would ask that we consider the principle of views held that are contrary to ours (as the current topic generates strong emotions) and ask if it should be acceptable to intimidate those that hold those views into submission/denouncing them? History does not look favourably on such actions - think of the Lesbian teachers in the 1950's who were branded 'deviants' and hounded out of the education system (Damn! There goes my attempt at diplomacy!)
Click to expand...

sorry mate, i'm off the opinion all bigots should be crushed, being diplomatic with people who discriminate on sexuality, race etc is ridiculous.
they should be outcasts.
 
judge said:
Firstly, let me apologise for the inflammatory nature of my earlier post, it was out of order. As to the core discussion; Much as we (me included) disagree with Gueye's alleged views he is allowed to hold them and to state them publically (much as i'm allowed to say that i don't believe in a divine being). As long as he doesn't incite hatred/intolerance he is fine. I think that we have to be careful that we don't merely believe in the theory of tolerence but then fail to put it into practice (however aien to our own morals a view may be). It's fine to disagree with Gueye's alleged views but it's not fine to want him hounded or his life made a misery. In an attempt at diplomacy, i would ask that we consider the principle of views held that are contrary to ours (as the current topic generates strong emotions) and ask if it should be acceptable to intimidate those that hold those views into submission/denouncing them? History does not look favourably on such actions - think of the Lesbian teachers in the 1950's who were branded 'deviants' and hounded out of the education system (Damn! There goes my attempt at diplomacy!)
Click to expand...

You're right. History is littered with shining examples of times we indulged people's intolerance of minorities.
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top