Letters: Israel Folau under fire over bushfire comments

Today readers have their say on Israel Folau’s comments linking the bushfires with the legalisation of same-sex marriage, rapper will.i.am’s racist claims against Qantas staff and proposed tenancy rule changes.

Israel Folau speaking at The Truth Of Jesus Christ Church.

THE comments and suggestion by former Wallabies star Israel Folau that the bushfires and drought crisis are a result of legalising same-sex marriage in Australia (C-M, Nov 18), show that perhaps Rugby Australia was right to end its contract with the controversial player.

Folau’s moralising on the topic of same-sex marriage and the link to bushfires is ridiculous.

Folau, who had kept a low profile for some time over his fight for unfair dismissal by Rugby Australia, following his comments about gays and other sinners going to Hell, has with his latest comments on bushfires and drought made a mockery of himself and his religious beliefs.

With a number of politicians in recent weeks making political capital with assertions of blame and other commentary about the bushfire crisis, Folau has added his name to a sorry bunch who should perhaps just stay silent and keep their opinions to themselves.

Paul Henderson, Wynnum

AFTER weeks of reading differing opinions from climate change scientists, farmers, green advocates and politicians, I finally came to the conclusion that there is nothing more we can do to prevent bushfires destroying people’s lives and homes.

Until now. Speaking at a church service in Sydney on Sunday, Israel Folau suggested the killer bushfires were God’s way of punishing Australians because of the recent legalisation of same-sex marriage and abortion.

But, I wonder why God started the Victorian 2009 Black Saturday bushfires, in which 173 people lost their lives, or the Victorian Black Friday fires. I hate to think what they were being punished for.

Sorry, I’m not convinced by Folau’s suggestion, so I’m back to my belief that there is nothing more we can do to prevent bushfires.

Valdy Kwitowski, Salisbury

I ADMIT I have been a supporter of Israel Folau in his fight with Rugby Australia.

However, his latest rant about the fires leaves me cold. We have the Greens telling us that it is the fault of climate change and now Folau telling us that it is God’s punishment as a result of same-sex marriage.

Is there no common sense from people who should know better?

It is nature, obviously fed by lack of reduction burning, and of course those who light fires.

It is time the Greens and Folau kept their mouths shut and allowed those who have lost their lives and homes to grieve, and if people are convicted for lighting these fires to spend many years in prison.

Tony Miles, Chermside

I HAVE been a bit of an Israel Folau supporter (even though, according to him, I’m doomed forever because I’m a Catholic).

Nevertheless, can I suggest he gets a grip on God’s great plan?

Does he really think that the fires of Hell would not have descended on this nation if issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage and promiscuity had not become generally acceptable practices? I don’t think so.

He should recall that the Garden of Eden was spoilt by the stupidity of man. But still, God persevered (with us).

I believe it is not God who is punishing us in any specific way now. Rather it is man, because of his lack of foresight and his recklessness in not preparing adequately for what we all knew could eventually happen.

Again we have spoilt our existence in the Garden of Eden.

Richard K. Tiainen, Holland Park West

*********

Will.i.am has accused Qnatas staff of racism. Photo by Richard Shotwell/Invision/AP, File

AIR SAFETY RULES APPLY TO RAPPERS TOO

N THE latest Qantas furore, this time involving rapper will.i.am flying to Sydney, he has sensationally accused a female flight attendant of racism (C-M, Nov 18).

Qantas has categorically denied this and I support the airline.

The airline’s primary concern at all times must be the safety and wellbeing of all its passengers.

Unsurprisingly, the Veronicas have come out in support of will.i.am following their own altercation with a flight attendant over an overhead luggage issue on September 30.

It sounds pathetic for the rapper to make the excuse that he couldn’t hear the PA because he was wearing noise-cancelling headphones.

Qantas is not a sound studio, but an airline where the rules apply similarly to all passengers, regardless of their supposed celebrity status.

Qantas still rules the sky.

Rudolf Bojtschuk, Brisbane City

WHATEVER admiration and respect I had for will.i.am has gone out the door, if reports of his behaviour are correct.

One should not disregard direction by the flight crew who are responsible to ensure that all passengers comply with safety instructions. My thoughts are with the Qantas crew members being accused of bias.

An apology by will.i.am is needed to resolve this issue, and then perhaps become an example for others to follow.

Karl Richter, Beenleigh

REGARDING the Veronicas vs Qantas situation that has been reignited, the question of whether they had a valid allegation seems to be easily solved.

If a person is 5ft 2in, is it possible to reach the overhead luggage compartment? If it is, time to retreat quietly ladies. However if it is not, Qantas needs to have an immediate look at its procedures.

The rule that flight attendants are not allowed to assist with passengers’ luggage in the overhead compartment is not fair for either the passengers or the attendants.

For a passenger of smaller stature, it leads to an awkward situation being asked to do something that they are physically incapable of, and for the flight attendant, it can lead to altercations arising out of that person’s embarrassment in being redressed by staff in front of a flight full of people.

Chris Levitt, Cornubia

***********

TENANCY CHANGES

I REFER to proposed changes to property rental rights (Letters, Nov 18).

Legislation addressing residential tenancies in Queensland was passed in 2008.

A review of the Act began in 2012 when the Residential Tenancies Authority called for submissions from the public. Its brief was to treat equally the rights and responsibilities of lessors and tenants. It took five years of gestation to pass the review into law in 2017.

As the Government wants to pass further amendments to the Act in 2020, as renters are a significant demographic, then maybe this time they might get it right.

Lessors have to be treated equally fairly as tenants.

There are glaring examples where this is not the case.

One area of grievance is the return of bonds. Agents have been known to withhold bonds unfairly.

If the RTA checked with the tenants that they are satisfied when agents claim all or part of the bond, this unfairness would be addressed.

When the proposal was made that the RTA have a database of defaulting tenants available to private lessors, their reply was this would cost money.

So private lessors are at the mercy of unscrupulous tenants.

Equally, a database of agents who do not attend to needed repairs in a timely manner would be helpful.

If the landlord refuses the repairs, the agent can report this to the RTA to avoid blame.

If legislation is to rectify deficiencies in the current rental market, effective measures have to be put in place.

Paul Andersen, The Gap

THERE are landlords and there are tenants, and there have been enough media reports highlighting the bad from the good.

If you hire a car, does the driver have the right to modify it with new wheels, a new sound system and even a new paint job? Like a hire vehicle, if the only colour offered is red and you don’t like red go to a company that has your colour.

If the landlord does not want pets, primarily dogs, find a property that does. If the tenant wants a pet, is the landlord obliged to put up a fence?

No doubt there are rental properties where rents are high, but rent is a marketable commodity.

Hire a Mercedes and the daily cost is much higher than a small Toyota. Both vehicles get you from A to B.

Media reports suggest the tenants are hard done by and the landlords are the ogres, but the landlords don’t rent out a house expecting tenants to fix it up. The tenant expects the landlord to cover the cost.

Judging by some weekly rental costs, you would think that it would be enough to cover the cost of a mortgage, but people make choices.

Peter Haslett, Cashmere

*********

Indigenous author Bruce Pascoe. Picture: Andy Rogers

BALANCE BLACK AND WHITE

HISTORY is a series of hypotheses that are subject to change as new information emerges.

Bruce Pascoe suggests in his book Dark Emu that Aborigines weren’t just primitive hunter-gatherers and gives sources to support that hypothesis.

Columnist Andrew Bolt (C-M, Nov 18) questions Pascoe’s evidence.

Bolt also mentions that ABC TV is to screen a two-part “history” by writer Bruce Pascoe next year.

Bolt questions whether Pascoe’s history is acceptable and questions Pascoe’s Aboriginal antecedents.

I think it is fine for the ABC to show Pascoe’s view of Aboriginal history but, I strongly urge, a Q&A program should be screened soon after, that includes Pascoe, Bolt and others on the panel to discuss this controversial hypothesis.

Clive Hodges, St Lucia

**********

OPEN JUSTICE

THE courts in Queensland, like those in the rest of Australia, operate on the principle of open justice: court proceedings are open to the public, and judges publish reasons for their decisions.

As very few people have the time or inclination to attend court or read judges’ published decisions, the public relies heavily on the press to keep it informed, to allow people to participate in informed, critical discussion of the business of the courts.

Peter Gleeson’s column (C-M, Nov 15) concerning the President of the Bar Association referred to magistrates in central Queensland handing out “stiff penalties, only to have them significantly reduced on appeal” in the District Court.

His vituperative attack on the decisions of the appeal judges contained no rational discussion and no analysis of the reasons.

Had Mr Gleeson read the decisions in question, he would have discovered that one of the appeal judges allowed the appeals before him after the prosecutor conceded that there had been two errors of law in the original sentences.

The judge in the other appeal, also accused of “leftist leanings” by Mr Gleeson, took into account the offenders’ ability to pay when imposing fines on resentencing.

The original sentences, which imposed the same fine on all the offenders regardless of age, means or antecedents, was contrary to an important principle in sentencing.

As the judge explained in his reasons, “Imposing the same fine on people with different capacities to pay, may result in some offenders being punished more severely than others for the same offence.”

This was sneeringly characterised in an earlier Editorial (C-M, Nov 9) as, “They are getting lighter fines because they are on welfare.”

But a court imposing a fine is required to take these matters into account by s48(1) of the Penalties and Sentences Act.

It should be noted that there has been no appeal by the prosecuting authorities against either of the decisions on the appeals or the sentences imposed by either judge.

Justice Judith Kelly, President, Judicial Conference of Australia

**********

Join the conversation. Send your letters to couriermail.com.au/letters or email to [e-mail]