Thread: AUSTRALIAN OF THE YEAR.......

Originally Posted by bob10

To be fair, Magaret Court is a product of her generation. If she deserves a gong for tennis it should have been given years ago. We have to ask why now? Is it because she is a leading light in a particular Christian movement? Don't blame her, the people who promoted her should have known it would cause division. And perhaps they did.

Margaret Court was given an AO in 2007 for her contribution to tennis and before that an MBE in 1967 - so she had already been rewarded for her contribution.

I agree that she should be able to express her views but to be rewarded with a AC is just not appropriate particularly when you look at what she got this for ""eminent service to tennis as an internationally acclaimed player and record-holding grand slam champion, and as a mentor of young sports persons". Now she has already been awarded for the tennis, and with views like she has is definitely not a mentor of young sports persons.

Oh - referring to comments made by others - she is not an Australian of the Year - that is a different award - she was made an AC in the Australia Day Honours List - different to Australian of the Year.

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Margaret Court was given an AO in 2007 for her contribution to tennis and before that an MBE in 1967 - so she had already been rewarded for her contribution.

I agree that she should be able to express her views but to be rewarded with a AC is just not appropriate particularly when you look at what she got this for ""eminent service to tennis as an internationally acclaimed player and record-holding grand slam champion, and as a mentor of young sports persons". Now she has already been awarded for the tennis, and with views like she has is definitely not a mentor of young sports persons.

Oh - referring to comments made by others - she is not an Australian of the Year - that is a different award - she was made an AC in the Australia Day Honours List - different to Australian of the Year.

Thanks for pointing that out. I agree.

Originally Posted by 101RRS

Margaret Court was given an AO in 2007 for her contribution to tennis and before that an MBE in 1967 - so she had already been rewarded for her contribution.

I agree that she should be able to express her views but to be rewarded with a AC is just not appropriate particularly when you look at what she got this for ""eminent service to tennis as an internationally acclaimed player and record-holding grand slam champion, and as a mentor of young sports persons". Now she has already been awarded for the tennis, and with views like she has is definitely not a mentor of young sports persons.

Oh - referring to comments made by others - she is not an Australian of the Year - that is a different award - she was made an AC in the Australia Day Honours List - different to Australian of the Year.

True, which makes the furore even more incomprehensible.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

An Australian of the year needs to be an aspirational and positive role model who brings out a better Australian and who represents us as a country in a positive light.

Margaret needs to drag her entitled face into the year 2000.

Adam Goodes did all of that? Maybe he was entitled as well.

Originally Posted by Tins

They gave one to Sir Robert Helpman for bloody dancing, Sir Jack Brabham for racing bloody cars, The Seekers for bloody singing, Lionel Rose for bloody hitting people, Evonne Goolagong for, wait for it, playing bloody tennis, Shane Gould for bloody swimming, Neville Bonner for being a bloody politician, Robert de Castella for bloody running, Paul Hogan for being bloody Mick Dundee, John Farnham for being a bloody voice, Alan Border for playing bloody cricket, Manawuy Yunuupingu for bloody singing, Cathy Freeman for bloody running, Mark Taylor for playing bloody cricket, Steve Waugh ditto, Tim Flannery for being a blood scaremonger, Ita Buttrose for being who knows what, Adam Goodes for being a bloody ok AFL player, and I could go on and on.

I'm with you on the "good" book thing, Mike. ALL the supposed good books are hugely divisive. Mein Kampf was a beauty.

And yep, most of it senseless and wasteful.

Sport placates the masses. A powerful political tool to control the population. Perhaps that’s why so many sport players were awarded.

Originally Posted by Old Farang

Yes, would be better to give her an award if she agreed to keep her big mouth shut!

I guess then that we either do that for all the recipients, or simply give the whole thing up. I mean, what did Lee Kernaghan contribute? He got one in 2008. For Country Singing. Amazing. Wonder what HIS opinions are. Anyone ask him?

Of course, Fiona Stanley should also be denied her opinions. They didn't agree with yours, right? Fred Hollows was a bigot, maybe? John Yu?

Do any of you actually know the opinions of these very few recipients of the Australian of the Year Award? Are you willing to attack them based on their opinions?

Margaret Court is a deeply religious person. Does that mean she is right?: NO. Does that mean she is wrong?: Who knows? Does that mean we have the right to judge her? : NO. She is what she is, a proud Australian. She has beliefs, which I don't agree with, but being Australian always meant giving the other person a fair go. Well, that's what it meant when I grew up. Apparently that doesn't mean bugger all now.
Margaret Court was a legend. Now, she's a pariah. Ask yourselves: Is this your own opinion, or is it the mob's. My money is on the mob. Try thinking for yourself. If you hate Margaret Court after you have thought, at least you own it.

I don’t know, I don’t like it all, it seems to me that they made the wrong decision, I don’t care whether it’s a man or a woman, I just think there were better candidates