Bachar Houli

[thaipantsman 180]

Refreshing racism is gradually being weeded out. No longer cool.

I recall at a match v Tigers some years ago when LJ got the ball in the middle, managed to get clear somehow and from 45 metres out with nothing between him and the goals Jurrah grubbed the ball through for a behind. A Guy two rows back in the Melbourne Members Northern stand ground level yelled out "take your boots off next time Jurrah" a comment greeted by laughter by most in earshot.

One of my big regrets was not reporting the Guy or at least challenging him then and there.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-09/port-adelaide-investigating-claim-bachar-houli-was-racially-vil/5732128?section=sport

[Ethan Tremblay 30,861]

Id love to know what the comments were

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

I have a feeling he may have been called a Muslim something or other and its being called 'racist'

He was allegedly called a terrorist.

[pantaloons 2,019]

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

Wow. I doubt Houli or members of the sane population share that view.

[nutbean 8,838]

Id love to know what the comments were

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

I have a feeling he may have been called a Muslim something or other and its being called 'racist'

And the hits just keep coming...

[praha 11,240]

Id love to know what the comments were

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

I have a feeling he may have been called a Muslim something or other and its being called 'racist'

What...?

So being a bigot is not okay if you attack and ridicule someone based on race, but it's okay to be a bigot if you're ridiculing someone based on their own personal faith?

Cool, gotcha.

[Gorgoroth 12,954]

Engage popcorn...

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

Oh wow, haha yeah I don't think faith is fair game, I reckon the AFL might come down pretty hard on this one

[P-man 13,366]

Id love to know what the comments were

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

I have a feeling he may have been called a Muslim something or other and its being called 'racist'

lol

Absolutely ridiculous post. True to form.

[s-t-i-n-g-a 439]

Id love to know what the comments were

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

I have a feeling he may have been called a Muslim something or other and its being called 'racist'

Go and give yourself an uppercut.

[binman 42,971]

Go and give yourself an uppercut.

or if he actually is employed GI read the employers EEO policy.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

Id love to know what the comments were

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

I have a feeling he may have been called a Muslim something or other and its being called 'racist'

Honestly, what kind of complete fool thinks like this? Racial vilification is no better or worse than religious vilification. They are both vile, as are your posts.

Mods, how about applying the code of conduct to thus guy?

[old dee 23,791]

Honestly, what kind of complete fool thinks like this? Racial vilification is no better or worse than religious vilification. They are both vile, as are your posts.

Mods, how about applying the code of conduct to thus guy?

I don't agree Moon IMO there is too much PC around.

I don't like the comment but we do have free speech in this country.

[Vanilla Gorilla 204]

I don't agree Moon IMO there is too much PC around.

I don't like the comment but we do have free speech in this country.

Free speech does't give you carte blanche to say whatever you want - It only extends to political communications.

Have a read of our constitution before speaking such carp.

Racial or religious vilification should always be singled out and condemned.

Edited September 9, 2014 by Vanilla Gorilla

[nutbean 8,838]

I don't agree Moon IMO there is too much PC around.

I don't like the comment but we do have free speech in this country.

I dislike the words " political correctness" - too many use these words to mask attitudes and values which I hope most decent people find abhorrent

[Elusive Tunbridge 795]

Religious vilification is surely out of order, but many organised religions and their associated organisations have perpetrated, condoned and/or covered up vile behaviour. Pointing at you, Catholics, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, Salvos etc. etc. et bluddy cetera. So hh is not entirely wrong.

[Nasher 33,616]

Id love to know what the comments were

Race is off limits, but religion is fair game

I have a feeling he may have been called a Muslim something or other and its being called 'racist'

Deplorable comment. Have two weeks off.

Religious vilification is no more "fair game" than racial vilification. Anyone else who wants to suggest it is can join h_h on the ban list.

[nutbean 8,838]

So hh is not entirely wrong.

Yes he is entirely wrong.

Lets us not confuse rationally debating the actions of any race and religion ( taking into account that generalising in itself is dangerous) and racial/religious vilification.

[ChaserJ 5,096]

Was reported that the idiot in the crowd yelled for Houli to go fight for ISIS.

I'm disgusted and the comment wasn't even directed at me.

Given Houli had just been promoting diversity as AFL ambassador two days before the game, AFL have to act. I'd imagine there'd be a bit of a political push on this one too.

BTW If you think having a go at someone's religion is ok, you may want to refer to the Charter of Human Rights.

[old dee 23,791]

As soon as you ban free speech you put democracy at risk IMO.

Who decides what is correct and what is not?

Sorry don't agree with your decision.

[nutbean 8,838]

Who decides what is correct and what is not?

Hopefully mature community standards dictate what is and isn't accepted.

I don't want to turn this political but amendments to "18c" were shelved because the community spoke.

George Brandis was wrong - " people don't have the right to be bigots"

edit- I wish we lived in a country where we don't have to legislate on these types of things - sadly this is not the case

Edited September 9, 2014 by nutbean

[Nasher 33,616]

Free speech does't give you carte blanche to say whatever you want - It only extends to political communications.

Have a read of our constitution before speaking such carp.

Racial or religious vilification should always be singled out and condemned.

Well said. I don't normally "quote for truth" but I think your post deserves to be repeated.

[old dee 23,791]

Hopefully mature community standards dictate what is and isn't accepted.

I don't want to turn this political but amendments to "18c" were shelved because the community spoke.

George Brandis was wrong - " people don't have the right to be bigots"

Sorry don't agree nutbean GB gave up because of a hostile senate but that is another story.

[nutbean 8,838]

Sorry don't agree nutbean GB gave up because of a hostile senate but that is another story.

4100 submissions would tell me otherwise

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-dumps-controversial-changes-to-18c-racial-discrimination-laws-20140805-3d65l.html

[Nasher 33,616]

Hopefully mature community standards dictate what is and isn't accepted.

I don't want to turn this political but amendments to "18c" were shelved because the community spoke.

George Brandis was wrong - " people don't have the right to be bigots"

On general society, you're spot on - mature community standards set what is acceptable.

On Demonland, which is not a Democracy, standards are set by the admin, and h_h's post fell well below the bar.

[daisycutter 29,616]

appropriateness of religious vilification depends on whether it is directed at the individual or the organisation and of course whether there is any degree of merit in it and in the context