Should someone be entitled to remain silent on an issue, due to their religious convictions? Or should they instead be forced to support an agenda, even if they believe it goes against the teachings of their faith? Is non-participation now a crime?
In most western countries everyone has the right to practice their own religion, or no religion at all. This is considered a basic human right. However, this following story illustrates how certain agendas completely trample over those human rights. It also illustrates the problem with forcing political issues and agendas into sport.
Last month Paris Saint-Germain footballer Idrissa Gueye missed his team’s game against Montpellier, because he didn’t want to play in a shirt that had his number emblazoned in rainbow LGBT+ colours.
Idrissa Gueye is Senegalese and a devout Muslim. He regularly shares his faith on social media.
Gueye has since received support from other Senegalese team mates, as well as the backing of the country’s president Macky Sall. A hashtag, #WeAreAllIdrissa, was trending on Twitter in support of Gueye, along with expressions for freedom of speech. A Change.org petition supporting Idrissa Gueye amassed more than 50,000 signatures, before Change.org cancelled it.
But pro-LGBT+ activists reacted angrily. LGBT+ advocacy group Rouge Direct tweeted this:
‘Homophobia is not an opinion but a crime, the LFP (League) and PSG must ask Gana Gueye to explain himself and very quickly. And punish him if necessary.’
‘Punish him’ … really? Gueye didn’t want to wear a rainbow shirt, that’s all. Is that really a crime?
Rouge Direct followed up by tweeting: ‘We reaffirm our demand: @PSG_inside must be firm and ask for explanations from Idrissa #Gueye to shed light on this case.’
The president of France LGBT+ Sports Federation, Eric Arassus, also expressed his views, saying:
‘Idrissa Gueye is a great player, but religion is not a part of the sport. Every player took part [in rainbow shirt initiative], except him. He should be sanctioned. Gueye’s excuses show that the club [PSG] and League let homophobia happen.’
He’s effectively saying that ‘religion is not a part of the sport’, but that supporting LGBT+ agendas is part of sport. Seems like an entanglement of contradiction and hypocrisy.
For further reading, here is an excellent UK article on the ‘culture of coercion and control that is fast replacing our legal system’ :
In the attached article, the author states: There is no law in the Western world that says a footballer must show solidarity with a political cause. On the contrary, the doctrine of compelled speech, found in US First Amendment doctrine, is unlawful in English law, as Lady Hale made clear in Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd and others  UKSC 49, citing Lord Dyson in RT (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  UKSC 38: