The Editor, 12 April 2020

Rugby fans worldwide will be well acquainted with the name Israel Folau. The giant ruby union and Ozzy national player is considered one of the finest players of his generation.

Between 2007 and 2008, whilst playing for Melbourne Storm, Folau broke the record for the most tries in a debut year. He went on to play with the Brisbane Broncos, spent two seasons playing brutal Ozzy rules football and made his international debut in 2013 against the British and Irish Lions. In 2019, he became the record holder for most tries scored in Super Rugby history.

Readers who aren’t rugby fans, or perhaps only tune in when the Six Nations is on (guilty as charged), may have heard his name anyway for reasons besides his sporting prowess. Last year, Folau – a devout Christian – hit the headlines after he posted a series of Bible verses on his Instagram account. Paraphrasing 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Folau wrote: “WARNING Drunks, Homosexuals, Adulterers, Liars, Fornicators, Thieves, Atheists, Idolators HELL AWAITS YOU. REPENT! ONLY JESUS SAVES”. 

The post was immediately dubbed ‘homophobic’ by an online mob and eventually, Folau’s employer Rugby Australia launched disciplinary action. In May 2019, a disciplinary hearing took place and the group ruled that Folau had breached his contract. Several days later, Folau lost his sponsor ASICS and on 17 May, his four year contract was terminated, ending his rugby union and international career.

The sacking of Folau sparked a fierce debate on free speech. Whilst some agreed with the sacking, the majority of commentators felt that in a free society, Folau should be able express his religious views and quote the Bible without fear of reprisals. What precedent, they opined, did his sacking set for Christians, and indeed others who have unfashionable views and a desire to share them online?

In June, Folau decided to challenge the decision, launching legal proceedings against Rugby Australia and New South Wales Rugby for unlawful dismissal. He sought an apology, compensation, and the right to play in rugby union again. In December 2019, it was announced that the parties had reached a private settlement. Yesterday, it emerged that the legal case cost Rugby Australia millions of dollars, compounding wider financial problems in the game.

The Israel Folau case is a sorry saga but it’s not altogether unusual in the West. In recent years, Christians have faced mistreatment by employers, private citizens, and even the state for expounding their faith. In Manchester, a council employee was sacked for posting on Facebook that he disagreed with same-sex marriage. In Liverpool, hoteliers lost their business after responding to a question about the Christian faith by a Muslim patron. And in Northern Ireland, a Christian-run bakery was pursued by a taxpayer-funded equality quango for refusing to ice a cake with the message ‘Support Gay Marriage’. When it comes to equality law, some groups are ‘more equal’ than Christians.

Folau’s case may not be unique but it’s important because it shows that in our ‘cancel culture’, status doesn’t matter. Israel Folau is a rugby superstar, a globally renowned athlete and yet, when the hate mob bayed for his blood, they got it. Rugby Australia soon caved to pressure to punish Folau for daring to express his Christian views. His views were out-of-step with the accepted orthodoxy on marriage and sexual behaviour. He had transgressed an unwritten social law. He had to suffer.

“When it comes to equality law, some groups are ‘more equal’ than Christians”

Folau and other Christians who have been targeted for their beliefs are fortunate in that they can appeal to the courts. The courts consider and try to balance competing rights and still value free speech and religious liberty in many cases, with the caveat that threats and harassment are always unlawful. But what if the law itself was compromised? What if the police and the courts were told that certain previously sayable ideas are now unsayable? Worryingly, the Sottish Government’s hate crime bill raises this prospect.

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) bill would make it an offence for a person to communicate ‘abusive’ information online, on paper, or on a mobile phone pertaining to age, disability, race, religion, sexuality, or transgender identity, if it is thought that such information is intended to ‘stir up hatred’ – or where the court concludes it is “likely” hatred would be stirred up. Exactly what the terms ‘abusive’ and ‘stirring up hatred’ mean is unclear.

In a world where both prominent Christians like Israel Folau, and other run-of-the-mill believers, have been punished for expressing their beliefs, it’s not unreasonable to wonder if this new law could compound intolerance against Christians.

What’s to stop a Christian who condones traditional marriage, sexual morality or medical ethics being accused of ‘stirring up hatred’ against LGBT people for example? What would happen if a Christian quoted 1 Corinthians on social media in the manner Israel Folau did? Would this be accepted as free speech? Or would it be dubbed hatred and prosecuted as an offence? In the times we live in, the latter seems like a real possibility.

The hate crime bill is unsettling to Christians and others who see free speech as a fundamental freedom that must be protected. We must communicate our concerns about the hate crime bill to politicians and pray for a just outcome that leads to more, not less, tolerance of Christian views.