Mostafa Mohamed

[Macfarlane21]

Are we even remotely interested in this player?

Hope not!

 

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

Presumably you don't believe that adulterers should be put to death, despite it saying so in the Bible.

Religious beliefs are a matter of interpretation. People pick and choose which parts they want and which they don't. I know plenty of Jews that eat pork. I also know Muslims who drink alcohol and others (sometimes the same people) who are fully supportive of LGBT rights. Saying "this is my religion" is a cop out, as in the case of this footballer who I hope we don't sign.

Fun fact. The Old Testament, Quran and Torah all state that the punishment for adultery should be death.

 

[BrisBlade]

In my view BrisBlade I totally get as a club how it should be that we support LGBQT people when you consider the awful abuse and homophobic chants for example that are heard in football, then there's the treatment of gay players which I'm sure hasn't always been ideal to say the least. I would never join in that that sort of stuff of abuse, not that to be fair that I've heard that at the Lane. I believe, as it says in the Bible love your neighbour and treat everyone as you would wish to be treated yourself; I think we'd all agree with that aspect. I do think that people of faith should be able to object to wearing the rainbow as that's their personal right to do so - in my view based on their understanding of sex and sexuality in my case within the Bible.

So back to this player and I presume he has similar views to me on this but his may be stronger and I am aware that many Muslim countries outlaw homosexuality all together and I don't agree with that by any stretch, people should be able to make their own choices and lifestyle just as I have as a Christian. But I really do believe there's a lack of respect for different views in this country and probably every country in fairness, as I said before, I don't see the LGBQT movement ever accepting respect between different views if it opposes their views, it seems we have to agree and support it otherwise you're a homophobic bigot, that's the bit that I disagree with because there's little acceptance of an alternative view to say no like this footballer did, when he did he was fined by Nantes which I think is an utter disgrace if I'm honest! Some would say it was because he refused to play but we all know why he refused to play.

Nantes at the time came and said this:

"First of all, Nantes would like to repeat its commitment in the fight against homophobia," the club said on its website. "Mostafa Mohamed, a striker for FC Nantes, refused to play in the match against Toulouse for personal reasons. To this end, the Nantes directors decided to punish him financially."

Nantes added it will continue to "fight against all forms of discrimination, as it always has done."

The irony of the above statement on "fighting all forms of discrimination" is laughable given they've just discriminated against him for his religious beliefs. If people can't see the hypocrisy in this then with respect I'd have to disagree!

I read what he said when he refused to play and that takes courage to make a stand as he did in a very secular country like France and what he said was very respectful in my view:

Responding to the incident on Twitter, Mohamed wrote: "I did not participate in the Toulouse-Nantes match today. I don’t want to argue at all, but I have to state my position. Respect for differences means respect for others, [but also] respect for oneself. Respect for what is shared and what remains different. I respect all differences. I respect all beliefs and convictions. This respect extends to others but also includes respect for my personal beliefs. Given my roots, my culture and the importance of my convictions and beliefs, it was not possible for me to participate in this campaign. I hope that my decision will be respected, as well as my wish not to argue about this and that everyone should be treated with respect."[3]

There was also a player for Toulouse who refused to play on a similar basis. I can't really add anymore on it and don't wish to add anymore, but anyone can personally message me if they wish no problems. If you've read all this, thanks! I know it's a long post!

Thanks for the additional context. It looks like he handled a difficult situation really well - maintaining his integrity while not inflaming the situation further. I can't help thinking that if we did sign him it would be a mistake for both the player and the club though, as it would almost inevitably put him in the same situation again.

As a side note, this discussion has been timely in keeping me engaged on this forum. The lack of respect and (usually humourless) bile spewed on some threads almost made me pull the pin. I always appreciate hearing a different perspective than my own if it's well presented, so thanks to those contributing to this one!

 

[Jon Bon II]

Issue is pal, is that not fascism?

'Agree with this otherwise you can't do that'.

Neither side of the argument should demand agreement.

The thing is, nowadays the left are so used to getting away with being judge, jury and executioner, they don't consciously know they're doing it. It's a natural reaction for them - 'think what we think, do as we do - or else....' Especially over the pond, where it's akin to North Korea Lite in most democrat strongholds.

 

[brownblade]

I'm keen to discuss the footballing traits of this player, so if we can all just agree religions were made up before any real science and global travel, then move onto this guy's pressing abilities?

 

[NateDogg]

Its not like anyone asked him to fully bum another man!

He was asked to wear something that is intended to symbolise that you recognise the humanity of others regardless of their sexual orientation… and he went AWOL.

Lightweight, shirking, bigoted dickhead can stay where he is with his crappy goal-scoring record in bloody farmers leagues en all.

This sort of reaction doesn't help either though does it. I agree with you in sentiment but this just makes the opposite opinion angry and want to retaliate.

The thing is, nowadays the left are so used to getting away with being judge, jury and executioner, they don't consciously know they're doing it. It's a natural reaction for them - 'think what we think, do as we do - or else....' Especially over the pond, where it's akin to North Korea Lite in most democrat strongholds.

Right OK, because that's exactly what the left are known for.

Anyway as others have said let's get conversation back onto the football before this thread depends into a load of arguments.

 

[Bladeloyal]

The more football immerses itself in causes and politics ,there will always be a kick back against it .Some players don't want to be used as tools for a cause ,they just want to play football without the sideshows . And we should respect their viewpoint

 

[Snowflake]

Fun fact. The Old Testament, Quran and Torah all state that the punishment for adultery should be death.

That would solve the problems with demand for NHS services !!

 

[VolcanicAsh]

People aren’t going to like it but I’m my opinion religion is a load of made up bollocks, that are often the root of most evil things… but then I’m an atheist. I don’t believe someone made the world and then allowed it to be this messed up.

Let people love who they want, and be who they want. It hurts nobody else by them being that way.

And as for the striker in question it’s a no from me. Can’t have him anywhere near the club, it’d be a right kick in the teeth to rainbow blades etc.

 

[Harrisblade]

This player might be religious but he knows, full well, that his stance signalled to everyone that he doesn't like/respect gay rights. Which is just unlikeable.

No.
It states that he doesn't want to actively SUPPORT gay rights. (Surely you can tolerate something without having to support it?)

 

[robbiez666]

People aren’t going to like it but I’m my opinion religion is a load of made up bollocks, that are often the root of most evil things… but then I’m an atheist. I don’t believe someone made the world and then allowed it to be this messed up.

Let people love who they want, and be who they want. It hurts nobody else by them being that way.

And as for the striker in question it’s a no from me. Can’t have him anywhere near the club, it’d be a right kick in the teeth to rainbow blades etc.

Let's be honest, the major religions all derive from similar ancient sources, written at a time where only pious men could read or write.

While there's a shared morality which still has some influence on modern life, most of what's in there doesn't. But people have taken and twisted the words to make the core texts look more relevant than they are while picking and choosing the bits they agree with.

Anyone living by the (literal) words of an ancient religious text is ridiculous.

 

[pommpey]

Its not like anyone asked him to fully bum another man!

'Fully bum'?

How do you 'partially bum' another man? I mean, I'm curious on the grounds of terminology because if you've got your haram upside the cheeks of a bloke, either in or out of the tea-towel holder, VAR would more than likely give the decision of 'bummery' and an indirect free kick given to the bummed in line with Law 16a.

Bummage is bummage when all is said and done. The ref can however wave advantage if the bummed smiles and goes 'oh, yeah, baby ... '*

pommpey

(Just to clarify - pommpey is fully aware that homosexual and bisexual relationships and sexuality there in is a myriad of complex and wonderful moments and not centred on this form of beastliness** and is using it as a pastiche vehicle of weak humour on homophobic attitudes in religion rather than slurring gay and bi people)

(Just to clarify - pommpey is fully aware that bummage mano-o-mano isn't sometimes 'beastly' but again is pastiching archaic attitudes to gay and bi sexuality)

 

[Bl4desutd]

He so apparently assulted zippy and bungle too

 

[Carlton Blade]

The thing is, nowadays the left are so used to getting away with being judge, jury and executioner, they don't consciously know they're doing it. It's a natural reaction for them - 'think what we think, do as we do - or else....' Especially over the pond, where it's akin to North Korea Lite in most democrat strongholds.

 

[Scarebus]

'Fully bum'?

How do you 'partially bum' another man? I mean, I'm curious on the grounds of terminology because if you've got your haram upside the cheeks of a bloke, either in or out of the tea-towel holder, VAR would more than likely give the decision of 'bummery' and an indirect free kick given to the bummed in line with Law 16a.

Bummage is bummage when all is said and done. The ref can however wave advantage if the bummed smiles and goes 'oh, yeah, baby ... '*

pommpey

(Just to clarify - pommpey is fully aware that homosexual and bisexual relationships and sexuality there in is a myriad of complex and wonderful moments and not centred on this form of beastliness** and is using it as a pastiche vehicle of weak humour on homophobic attitudes in religion rather than slurring gay and bi people)

(Just to clarify - pommpey is fully aware that bummage mano-o-mano isn't sometimes 'beastly' but again is pastiching archaic attitudes to gay and bi sexuality)

Just the tip innit

 

[pommpey]

Just the tip innit

But, 'inside the area'

Ref should blow and stop play

pommpey

 

[Weasel]

No.
It states that he doesn't want to actively SUPPORT gay rights. (Surely you can tolerate something without having to support it?)

Well that's definitely true (your second point). I tolerate Sheffield Wednesday and I can categorically confirm I do not support the sniveling fuckers.

 

[Booker4]

People aren’t going to like it but I’m my opinion religion is a load of made up bollocks, that are often the root of most evil things… but then I’m an atheist. I don’t believe someone made the world and then allowed it to be this messed up.

Let people love who they want, and be who they want. It hurts nobody else by them being that way.

And as for the striker in question it’s a no from me. Can’t have him anywhere near the club, it’d be a right kick in the teeth to rainbow blades etc.

I totally get your view Ash, hope you don't mind me responding and I know the amount of bad stuff done in the name of religion is horrific both now and in the past. However, man is man regardless in my view, and I don't for one minute think that if the world today became fully atheist that it would be any more peaceful, loving, tolerant etc because it's not like we can say without religion we all agree on everything is it? War after war happens to the present day that has nothing to do with religion, Ukraine is one example, man will always be greedy and wants whatever it wants/sees right and that of course is subjective. Look how the planet is now and how we've totally made a mess of it as humans and much of that is nothing to do with religion but man only.

Whether people like a religion or not, there is also so much good done in the name of religion also, certainly I know many food banks in this country are run by churches for example, so are many, many charities also that have Christian beginnings if not to the present day. You could argue that without religion there would still be charities that are secular as there are now also and they'd fill the void, but I think that's debatable and I can only speak for me in my life that being a Christian has made a huge difference for the better for me, the way I speak and treat people, how I try to love everyone I meet even Wednesday fans and see the good in people (yes all that can be done as an atheist but me personally if I wasn't a Christian I know I wouldn't be as bothered about others I'd just want to live for me and only for there's I care about/liked. I don't believe in God to be a better person by the way but I would say it has made me a better person for it if that makes sense.

As for the striker, I get people's views, it would be very, very difficult for a player to do that here, and it was just as tough for him in France. But as others have said, when you involve causes/politics in football then there will be some who don't agree with it based on their view, religious or not, and it should, in my view, be up to the individual to make their choice on wearing the Rainbow badge as it was also to take the knee (I fully am behind the taking of the knee just for context but some weren't for various reasons).

 

[YES Blade]

And as for the striker in question it’s a no from me. Can’t have him anywhere near the club, it’d be a right kick in the teeth to rainbow blades etc.

Based on the quotes from the player in the star article I don’t see how it would be an issue.

It seems the player is happy to respect people’s differences but it’s going to show support by wearing a rainbow flag on his shirt, which to me is perfectly fine.

It should be a personal choice if a player wants to use rainbow laces, kneel for Black Lives Matter or have a poppy on his shirt.

 

[Booker4]

Another point no one's mentioned is the T in the LGBQT debate and I know for a fact the differences of opinion on this one irrespective of religion. The Rainbow fag stands unified behind the rights of trans people, and again I fully get those that are passionate about trans rights, but there's lots of debates ongoing on the merits of that, how it affects single sex spaces in society and sport, how many genders are there, it's something that I think society is far from united on yet wearing the Rainbow flag as I would see it champions the rights of trans people to self identify as the gender they want and when people say just wear the flipping rainbow and shut up, I would argue that trans rights element of LGBQT has an impact on other groups of people including children.

 

[Teddy]

Cutting back to the point of forcing players to wear LGBT symbols I also think I just completely undermines the point.

If players have to wear them (as in there is zero choice other than being slammed in the media and fined) then we have absolutely no sense of whether players are, in fact, anti-homophobia (or anti-racist, sexist etc depending on the campaign in question).

A big part of the point of these campaigns (I thought) was to make racist/homophobic dinosaurs stop for a minute and realise that their sporting icons categorically do not agree with them. Forcing the wearing of this stuff just allows these dinosaurs to think “our poor Billy having to wear than when I know he hates that lot just like me”.

 

[tincan]

Cutting back to the point of forcing players to wear LGBT symbols I also think I just completely undermines the point.

If players have to wear them (as in there is zero choice other than being slammed in the media and fined) then we have absolutely no sense of whether players are, in fact, anti-homophobia (or anti-racist, sexist etc depending on the campaign in question).

A big part of the point of these campaigns (I thought) was to make racist/homophobic dinosaurs stop for a minute and realise that their sporting icons categorically do not agree with them. Forcing the wearing of this stuff just allows these dinosaurs to think “our poor Billy having to wear than when I know he hates that lot just like me”.

Lets not forget we're a rainbow club owned by a Muslim prince, so if HRH can square the circle perhaps Mostafa can ?

 

[Gin&Juice]

Don't think we're signing him. Just signed permanently with Nantes. More chance of signing Christopher Christen.

 

[Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou]

You know its going to be a long boring summer when threads like this will make a few pages

 

[themaninblack]

“The Rainbow fag…”
Booker4 Steady on old chap, no need for that sort of language!

 

[ATL Recs]

Essentially refused to play on the homophobia awareness day as I understand it

And he explained why

 

[Booker4]

“The Rainbow fag…”
Booker4 Steady on old chap, no need for that sort of language!

Oh pants, not good on the laptop to be honest despite using one for last twenty years or so, always have to edit everything several times with spelling errors, typos etc!

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

My view for what it’s worth is if you are signing up for a new job you are signing to agree with the ethos and standards of that organisation. If you don’t like that then you find someone else to work for. It’s fine having your own beliefs etc. but you shouldn’t expect an employer to ignore if they are contrary to the beliefs and standards of their company.

 

[Bladeloyal]

My view for what it’s worth is if you are signing up for a new job you are signing to agree with the ethos and standards of that organisation. If you don’t like that then you find someone else to work for. It’s fine having your own beliefs etc. but you shouldn’t expect an employer to ignore if they are contrary to the beliefs and standards of their company.

I'm sure a employment lawyer would pick a few holes in that statement.utter drivel

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

I'm sure a employment lawyer would pick a few holes in that statement.utter drivel

I did say it was my view. As for utter drivel my view is also that is a description of all religions but I am more than happy to accept that others feel otherwise and I respect their views. Respecting others views is in pretty short supply on here it seems.
On employment why would you work for a company whose ethos and beliefs you fundamentally disagreed with. I’m not about to sign up to work for the Catholic Church after all. There are agreed behaviours in most jobs, if you fail to abide by those you are subject to disciplinary action.