Jaguar I-Pace Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a deposit on an I-Pace with my local dealer. £1,000. I left it with a view to deciding between the I-Pace if I could afford it this summer - or a Velar. One or the other. I specced a Velar yesterday and intended to talk to the dealer Saturday.

I'm collecting the deposit tomorrow. I will not buy a JLR product. Ever.

This is why:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12053873

You may or not agree with this stance by JLR, but as both an ex-pat kiwi and a Christian I am beyond reasonable and rational understanding of any company's refusal to respect any individuals right of free speech and belief. I happen to share this footballers views on homosexuality - the Bible is clear - but worse than that is the obnoxious and high-handed attitude of JLR in refusing to recognise or respect this fine, decent footballers opinion. One he holds with a deep conscience.

JLR loses this sale, many I hope when the right gets hold of this. If they are so arrogant not to care then they will pay a small price. But any price is worth it to me. I don't care if anyone disagrees - I will always defend anyone's right to hold and express any opinion if its lawful.
 
G

·
God gave us all free will.

JLR executed their free will - You executed your free will.

JLR didn't refuse or disrespect his views ... they just didn't want to be associated with his views. They said "ok that's your view, fine, however we are not happy in a sponsership deal with you".

BTW the title should be "No JLR car for me ... ever!"

You have the right to be offended and take your money else where ... but you being offended doesn't make you right.

Good luck in whatever car you buy! (Just don't look too closely at religious views of other car makers ... or you might end up walking everywhere!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
You must be very limited to which top brands you can use, as every large brand that regularly sponsors "celebs" has dropped some mid-contract.

Tiger Woods, Maria Sharapova, Ant McPartlin are just of the top of my head but there are thousands at all levels. It will be a basic term of the contract.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Hmm, wondering what your reaction would have been if JLR had done the same to, let's say, someone gay. Curious to see if your "refusal to respect any individuals right of free speech and belief" would still apply here...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
If anyone was gay I would have felt exactly the same - defending to the hilt his right for freedom of choice and speech. And no, being offended does not make me right. Fully agree. But this discrimination would not be acceptable in any other circumstance, and being offended by this degree of corporate madness PC lets me make my own point - don't buy JLR. As for free will - true. I've just exercised it.

The issue here is would the same have happened to an Islamist who hold extreme views on Homosexuality and are sponsored by JLR? No and never.
To blatantly discriminate against Christian for their beliefs is totally unacceptable.
I have written to request my deposit back. Good luck to all you here who clearly don't care - to those who have some morals, I doubt you'd go this far for your belief, but as an active promoter of free speech and defender of values, I feel I have a principal to defend.

I'm out of JLR. Not alone judging by the backlash, and feel for this one guy in my home country standing up for something in this sick world.
 
G

·
Ty Rua said:
To blatantly discriminate against Christian for their beliefs is totally unacceptable.
They didn't discriminate due to his beliefs ... the stopped the sponsorship, due to his comments he made.

They are free to do that .... he is free to go an buy a JLR vehicle with his own money ... just no freebies under a sponsorship deal.

If you want a civilised discussion over the topic that's fine, but please don't go twisting facts to suit your protest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Nothing you would understand Sparks. Go back to sleep. This thread won't be here long anyway.

JLR has its own ethical policies they have breached. "JLR promotes diversity and equality and does not unfairly discriminate on any ground, including (but not limited to): race, caste, religion, colour, ancestry, marital status, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation, pregnancy, maternity, age, nationality, ethnic origin, disability, veteran status or any other category protected by applicable law".

They are free to do as they wish - I too am doing the same. No JLR products in my family, nor in many in America by the looks of the response to this in Christian circles. Discrimination is not one-way. The person in question has a Lamborghini so he's not affected by JLR's action. He retains his values and has no regrets for his actions despite disgraceful behaviour from JLR.

Look, I don't care what you think, I'm out, just hoped there were ethical poster here that might have agreed with this specific persecution of a Christian believer from a multi-national. If not, this country is in a sad state of denial. I hoped your conscience might have been stronger than your pride.
 
G

·
Ty Rua said:
Look, I don't care what you think, I'm out, just hoped there were ethical poster here that might have agreed with this specific persecution of a Christian believer from a multi-national. If not, this country is in a sad state of denial. I hoped your conscience might have been stronger than your pride.
Thank you for that last paragraph.... shows you are not here for a reasonable debate but attention. Bye
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Hmm, if I were JLR and was thinking about whether to provide a free car to someone to be a brand ambassador, well, if that person turned out to be a jerk, I'd decide not to provide the free car. Any notion that this is remotely related to freedom of speech or religion is laughable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
All "freedom of speech" means is that you can't be thrown in jail or be otherwise legally punished for speaking your beliefs - even if those beliefs violate other fundamental rights. It certainly does not mean you have the right to not be treated differently based on the opinions you voice. Not unless other fundamental rights are broken in the process. Mr. Folau does not have "a right" - God-given or otherwise - to become an ambassador for JLR, it is totally up to them who they choose for such a position.

The entire concept of an ambassador is to have someone who represents you and the things you stand for, and as such can "act in your stead". Let me dumb this down for you - if I post video's of me burning my country's flag in the street, that pretty much zeroes my chances of ever being considered for the position of ambassador of my country.

So obviously JLR is not doing anything illegal or even morally questionable by not making someone their ambassador based on the opinions this person voices. I think even you know that. So thats why you resort to the classic flawed logic: well, but if it would not be just his opinion, but that of a large group (be it race, gender, nationality, sex or religion), then maybe this is... wait for it... Discrimination!!

No. It isn't. Not by a long shot. And to dare call this "persecution of Christians" is just mindblowingly insulting to anyone who has ever really been persecuted for their beliefs - religious or otherwise.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top