Marc Guehi

[Erikse]

There's sometimes this idea that people must have a strong opinion about things. You either love something, or you hate it. You're either pro or anti.

[Skeletor]

Just now, Erikse said:

There's sometimes this idea that people must have a strong opinion about things. You either love something, or you hate it. You're either pro or anti.

 

Being gay is not an opinion issue. We exist.

[Conjo]

It's impossible to keep politics and religion out of football, like most things in life. There are religious LGBTQ+ people and allies as well, so I find it difficult to accuse him of having bigoted views unless he comes out and specifies exactly what he meant by this statement. Since he seems to be a near and good friend of Gordon who seems to be a canny person I want to give him the benefit of doubt and hope it was with good intentions.

 

Sam Moresy refused to wear a rainbow armband for Ipswich against Forest, which would obviously be a better way to go about it if he had something against LGBTQ+ people.

[Erikse]

Edit: Misread something

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Erikse

[Skeletor]

2 minutes ago, Erikse said:

 

Uh? How did you read that from my post?

 

"People feel they need to have strong opinions"

 

Being gay is not about opinions. It's a fact gay people like myself exist. There is no debate, no opinions and no justification for discrimination due to religious beliefs.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Skeletor

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 hour ago, Cronky said:

It sounds like a messy attempt to please everyone. The guy is young and should be treated with some understanding.

This is the generous view, yep. It’s possible. 

[Slim]

Also using something that's not even real to justify does not make it ok.

[Erikse]

3 minutes ago, Skeletor said:

 

"People feel they need to have strong opinions"

 

Being gay is not about opinions. It's a fact gay people like myself exist. There is no debate, no opinions.

 

I misread it as you were saying that it's not an issue.

 

You know that it's possible to not want to wear the armband and still not be against gay people? I'm talking about the Ipswich player for instance.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Erikse

[Smal]

1 hour ago, loki679 said:

You can't be forcing people to promote a viewpoint they don't agree with.

 

supporting LGBTQ is about supporting basic human rights though. It’s not really a viewpoint, opinion or political matter.

 

The clubs should’ve just made someone else captain that day if players refused to wear it or, arguably worse, wanted to deface it.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Smal

[Tiresias]

It's a difficult minefield, if we force people to wear it what kind of show of support is that? If we don't probably see so few would undermine rather than help. It does stick in the craw that people will promote whatever hideous gambling stuff but object to this. Equally it is absolutely the arena that needs to be visible. I'm not sure if anything good comes from singling people out too much for not showing it, especially when it is ambiguous. Guehi may have meant no offence, I do not mind him saying he loves jesus it just feels obviously somewhat pointed. I'd rather that we just did more education, more actual outreach rather than just sticking the rainbow on and calling that everything and then calling outrage when a few don't. 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Tiresias

[Skeletor]

Just now, Erikse said:

 

I thought you were saying that it's not an issue.

 

You know that it's possible to not want to wear the armband and still not be against gay people? I'm talking about the Ipswich player for instance.

 

That doesn't even make any sense. Not wearing it and citing religious beliefs is a message you don't support gay people.

[Erikse]

1 hour ago, Skeletor said:

 

That doesn't even make any sense. Not wearing it and citing religious beliefs is a message you don't support gay people.

 

And this reads "you either love it or you hate it", as I said.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Erikse

[DiddyLevine]

No one should be forced to agree with something they dont agree with 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by DiddyLevine
sp

[andyc35i]

Someone with beliefs like that isn’t a person I want representing our team. I get there’s a religious element he’s getting at, but you just don’t make a statement like that as it’s irrelevant to the campaign and not about a ‘belief’ - it’s a human right to live the way you want to and not have fear for your sexuality

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by andyc35i

[DiddyLevine]

People religious beliefs , as barmy as they might sound to the rest of us ought to be respected . Doesnt mean we have to agree with them . We can agree to disagree

[AyeDubbleYoo]

1 hour ago, loki679 said:

You can't be forcing people to promote a viewpoint they don't agree with.

This sounds great and I agree with it principle. But how about things which are as basic as this.

 

If someone opted out of an anti racism campaign because they thought black people were inferior, I don’t think we’d just be saying “fair enough, it’s personal belief”. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

3 minutes ago, DiddyLevine said:

People religious beliefs , as barmy as they might sound to the rest of us ought to be respected . Doesnt mean we have to agree with them . We can agree to disagree

Not as simple as that though. People’s freedom to practice their religion is to be respected, but when it comes into the public sphere it becomes a lot more complicated. 

[Chris_R]

10 minutes ago, DiddyLevine said:

No one should be forced to agree with something they dont agree with 

 

 

 

Absolutely. 

 

But they should be judged on that stance. 

 

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.

[DiddyLevine]

Just now, Chris_R said:

Absolutely. 

 

But they should be judged on that stance. 

 

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.

There should be consequences for disagreeing on something ? 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Maybe the best option would’ve been that he had to step down from captaincy if he felt he couldn’t wear the armband. 
 

FWIW I respect religion immensely but it’s a lot more difficult when they have a belief like this which is in conflict with basic human life. I’m not sure how you can respect that bit so much. 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by AyeDubbleYoo

[DiddyLevine]

1 hour ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

 

I’m completely for freedom of religion but there must be a point where you say, “it’s not OK to think gay people are inferior” etc. 

 

 

 

So we should police what people think ? 

How would you do that ? 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Just now, DiddyLevine said:

So we should police what people think ? 

How would you do that ? 

You obviously can’t police what people think, not really sure what you’re asking. You can have standards for what people say or do. 

[Segun Oluwaniyi]

25 minutes ago, Skeletor said:

 

Being gay is not an opinion issue. We exist.

I do not understand this statement; many groups of people exist. One can acknowledge they exist without wearing the group's paraphernalia at their place of employment. Refusal to do so does not make them hateful or evil, no matter how much certain people will protest. Frankly, trying to frame the issue as ”not political" is just a rhetorical attempt to limit discussion and push back. The statement is inherently political, to the point that there are actual policy debates around it to this day.

 

 

Edited December 3, 2024 by Segun Oluwaniyi

[DiddyLevine]

1 minute ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

Maybe the best option would’ve been that he had to step down from captaincy if he felt he couldn’t wear the armband. 
 

FWIW I respect religion immensely but it’s a lot more difficult when they have a belief like this which is in conflict with basic human life. I’m not sure how you can respect that bit so much. 

 

 

 

Its respecting their right to disagree with the rest of us . Its not agreeing with them . We are free to criticise their opinion . Its the very definition of free speech

[Pablo123]

4 minutes ago, Chris_R said:

Absolutely. 

 

But they should be judged on that stance. 

 

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.

So there should be consequences for him having Christian beliefs and loving Jesus?