Fury is, and should be able to say whatever he wants. Just as, everyone has the right to disagree with what he says, but the idea of him being reported to the police, or being kicked off the awards show is absurd. It just makes a martyr of Fury, and creates a barrier between him, and the rest of society when we should be debating the issue, and trying to explain why Fury's views are so backward.

Also, as I've said before, people who beat people up for a living shouldn't be considered good role models for kids. If some parents are worried that someone like Tyson Fury is having an adverse affect on their child then the problem is with them, and not with Fury.

youtu.be/ceS_jkKjIgo People can say what the they want. It's then up to the intelligent people in society whether to take any notice of that or not. If some village-idiot dullard like Tyson Fury wants to come out with some bull about fairytale religion horse crap and backwards views about women and abortion (even if he equates them to paedophilia) the that's his right and his decision and more importantly his views. It impacts our lives as little as the Queens speech on Christmas Day. It means precisely nothing to any of us. I'll go one further than Steve Hughes and proclaim that being "offended" doesn't exist. How can someone else's words offend you? If you disagree with someone's words fair enough but for them to make you angry or upset? Really?! People should always be free to say what they want, it's when they take action because of their views when society should step-in.

youtu.be/ceS_jkKjIgo People can say what the they want. It's then up to the intelligent people in society whether to take any notice of that or not. If some village-idiot dullard like Tyson Fury wants to come out with some bull about fairytale religion horse crap and backwards views about women and abortion (even if he equates them to paedophilia) the that's his right and his decision and more importantly his views. It impacts our lives as little as the Queens speech on Christmas Day. It means precisely nothing to any of us. I'll go one further than Steve Hughes and proclaim that being "offended" doesn't exist. How can someone else's words offend you? If you disagree with someone's words fair enough but for them to make you angry or upset? Really?! People should always be free to say what they want, it's when they take action because of their views when society should step-in.

I think when someone is describing you as less than them, just because of who you are ie skin colour, gender, sexuality etc then you could well be offended.
But it's not being offended that's the issue, I don't care about how many or how few people are offended by what anyone says.

I do care about parts of society being belittled and denigrated. I don't care whether that's homosexuals, women, Muslims, or (in the case of this government and certain sections of the media) the poor and disabled.
Dividing society into sections only leads to competition and division in society, and that leads to distrust and dislike or hatred, which in turn ultimately leads to violence.

Again, I don't think anyone on here has said Fury should be arrested or not be able to express his views. So I'm not sure why it's become an issue on here and I still don't get why some people are so keen to defend him or paint him as some kind of "victim" or that some people on here are going over the top in their condemnation of Fury.

In my opinion the condemnation of Fury has been sorely underwhelming. It should be made much, much more obvious what a complete and utter c[nt he really is.

I'd also add, whilst I don't think Fury should have had his nomination rescinded, I have sympathy with that viewpoint. Because putting him up on that stage with the likes of Murray, Rutherford, Sinfield and Ennis gives him a kind of equity with them that he doesn't deserve.

On a Sportspersons awards programme he has equity with them as he is a world title holder i.e. the best in the world just like the others

Typically you are trying to politicise the event by focusing on his out of ring comments. A similar number of people voted for him that voted for the face of the London Olympics



Nothing like simplifying life

Society will decide the level of condemnation not extreme liberals like you. Have you maybe considered that you are the other end of the spectrum to someone like Fury and that people despise your extreme unwelcome sterilising view.

No he doesn't. None of those other people espouse such views. Equality and discrimination are just as relevant in sport as they are anywhere else.


Only if you think equality doesn't belong in sport. Which would be a strange thing.
And yes, my problem is with those 72,000 douchebags who voted for him.


You don't think discriminatory views are divisive in society? They don't, for instance, lead to violence against those who are viewed as inferior or less worthy in some fashion?

Fury clearly has a degree of bi-polar. No excuse but his mouth is always going to run away with him. I'm more offended by someone using the term 'douchebag'....American cobblers of the highest order...you can pack that in.

I was meaning by the media and other organisations. But helpful you brought up society deciding. Society did decide. There has been lots of condemnation by ordinary people. They organised a petition for instance. But you criticised society's response. Just as you've criticised the response by this society on here.

I desperately, desperately hope I am at the other end of the spectrum to Fury. Everyone should be.

The fact that you would describe someone who merely doesn't want one section of society discriminated and denigrated as an extreme liberal shows you up for what you really are. I've not called for Fury to be investigated in any sense by the state. So, yet again, is Fury to be allowed free speech but not anyone who disagrees with his disgraceful views? You sound very much like his uncle. Y'know, the one who doesn't think gays should be equated to paedophiles but they're still basically second class citizens.

As you think equality is an extreme liberal, unwelcome position, I'm starting to wonder if you actually agree with Fury.
It seems a very committed defence of a scumbag from you otherwise.

Even if you put to one side his views in regards to suitability for a sports award, he still spoke about himself in the 3rd person....."Tyson Fury doesn't hate people".....that alone was good enough reason not to vote for him.

But he holds 3 world boxing titles and as such is one of the best sportsman/women we have in UK. End off, and as such should be judged on his sporting achievements in a sporting awards competition.That, even you can't argue against albeit you will because your an opinionated bigot.

'And yes, my problem is with those 72,000 douchebags who voted for him.'

What's your problem with the douchebags who maybe have an alternate opinion to you?

Zak hardaker was on that stage...is he fit to be on there with the likes of Murray? Ennis etc? Maybe he and fury had a friendly chat over a woo woo backstage?