In a recent appearance on the HBO series Costas Now, Colts coach Tony Dungy showed his true colors.
Dungy, a devout Christian, was initially asked if he'd have a problem with having a Muslim, Jew, or atheist on his team.
Dungy immediately answered no. He doesn’t proselytize to his players, he said.
Costas followed up with the same question about an openly gay player.
And Dungy paused.
He actually paused and crossed his arms—in obvious discomfort—before responding with canned blather about letting the player know what he thinks, and what the Bible says.
Dungy also said that if the player were good he'd have no problem with it.
But if that's the case—why the pause? Why the discomfort?
I’m not gay. I’m a straight white male—and I’m completely and utterly offended that Dungy paused to a question to which any sane, intelligent person would reply, “I have no problem with it at all.”
Tony Dungy was the first African American coach to lead his team to a Super Bowl championship. I personally didn’t find the feat particularly earth-shattering.
Besides the color of Dungy's skin, what made his accomplishment any different than a white coach winning the Super Bowl for the first time? Is Bill Belichick's fair complexion responsible for his success? In beating Dungy time and again over the years, did Belichick prove that black coaches were somehow inferior? Was it Jon Gruden's whiteness that helped him lead Dungy's Bucs to the promised land immediately after Dungy's departure?
Seriously, who gives a damn what color your skin is?
And by the same token, who gives a damn whom you sleep with?
I’m sure that Tony Dungy faced his share of racial bias while rising through the coaching ranks. He certainly did in his playing career—as when he was converted from quarterback to defensive back after being drafted from the University of Minnesota by the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Given that history, Dungy should understand how pernicious prejudice can be.
And homophobia is no exception.
Okay—the Bible says it’s wrong. The Bible also states that any man working on the Sabbath shall be put to death. (Exodus 35:2). Doesn’t bode too well for a job that requires you to work a minimum of 17 Sundays a year, does it Tony?
The Bible also advocates slavery, by the way. I'm guessing Tony wouldn’t agree with that.
If you believe it's wrong to be gay—fine. It’s an ignorant view of the world, but it's your absolute right as a human being to believe whatever the hell you want to believe.
In that vein, though, would it be okay for a white owner to believe a white coach would do a better job coaching his football team? Maybe it would if the Bible said so—which is of course how white land owners justified slavery.
The bottom line here?
Scripture isn't and can't be a fig leaf for bigotry. I'd hope that Tony Dungy would've learned that much on his way to the top.
comments (81) write a comment »
write a new comment
8 months ago
Coach Dungy is exactly right. Homosexuality is a choice. It's not a race.
from 8 months ago
and the world is flat too right?
from 8 months ago
How old were you when you chose to be straight?
I fail to see how those of us who are straight are in any position to claim that homosexuality is a choice. I certainly have never had to decide that I like women--I just do. When you were growing up did you find yourself attracted to both men and women and then at some point choose heterosexuality?
I've worked with more than a few homosexuals and have become friends with them. A couple times this whole 'homosexuality as choice' discussion comes up and I've never had one of them tell me that it was, indeed, a choice.
The reason America is such a great place to live is that we have a secular society and that people are allowed to be themselves to a much larger degree than in many other places in the world. How another person decides to live his or her life is none of my business and if I encounter them in a professional setting, my only concern is how they perform their job.
from 8 months ago
I am replying to the article not the comments. Is this guy for real? He must be god, because he can now interupt pauses and knows what Coach Dungy is thinking. I think he has too much time on his hands or maybe a chip on his shoulder towards Chrisitans. Shows his true colors? Since when does one pause show someone's true colors. It sounds a little like Christian bashing to me. It seems like this guy has the problem with Chrisitans.
8 months ago
Tony Dungy is one of the classiest individuals in this country. He knows the difference between right and wrong. It's disgusting that this blogger defends the sinful act of homosexuality.
from 8 months ago
The sinful acts of homosexuality? Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone my friend.
I hope you're not wearing garments made of two different threads today, or ya know, we may have to kill you. That's from the same back which calls homosexuality a sin.
Your level of ignorrance baffles me.
8 months ago
So right. I'm a huge Colts fan but Dungy's bigotry is an embarrassment to me. And to think he is a modern icon of black empowerment, his ideology of gays appears on the same level as those who believed blacks were inferior.
8 months ago
Had not heard this yet....surprising coming from him....just another reason why religion has caused more bloodshed and intolerance than just about any other factor over the course of time....you would think that we could have gotten passed it but obviously not...it's beacuse of this that there will never be an openly gay player in sports....at least not in our lifetime...sad
from 8 months ago
it's not religion's fault, it's the people.
think of it this way:
Man creates sword. "with the sword I can defend my castle, i can defend my family, I can defend me" or... "with the sword I can ravage and kill and conquer". The sword is all powerful.
it's not the sword, it's the man holding it.
8 months ago
Dungy is sticking to the faith he practices. This argument of comparing race and homosexuality is a bit "out there". You say you didn't find the accomplishment of being the first African American coach to win a Super Bowl "earth-shattering"? Neither did Dungy. If you look back at interviews with Dungy from around the Super Bowl, he acknowledges that it's an honor, but what he's really proud of is the exposure of the coaching styles of himself and Lovie Smith. They are classy coaches, they don't yell at their players, they send everyone home on time to be with their families, and don't curse or cut anyone down. While this may sound like they baby their players, read the players' comments about how the technique works (discipline is still very present, just not in the form everyone expects) and look at the results. I think it actually shows a great deal of tolerance and acceptance that Dungy, despite the fact he disagrees with homosexuality because of his faith, wouldn't discriminate against a homosexual player. Never did he say he wouldn't allow a homosexual player on his team, nor would he treat them any differently. He was merely made uncomfortable by the question and I'm sure wanted to choose his words carefully to prevent an article exactly like this from being written. BTW the Bible doesn't advocate slavery in the sense that we now use the term. It's important to clarify this misconception because it's one that is easy to make and very common. Slavery in those times was a way of paying off a debt to another. You worked and were paid, and once you paid off your debt you were free to go. Usually just the man (father, husband) worked and his family lived at home and he returned to them afterwards. It DOES NOT advocate putting entire families in an inescapable system where they work under harsh conditions and encourage the strongest to reproduce to give birth to more strong-bodies workers until they either die or risk their lives by fleeing in the night. Everyone has things that rub them the wrong way and they have their reasons for it. Maybe you don't like the way that lady in your office laughs or you that obnoxious guy in the cubicle next to you who has to one-up everybody and so you ignore them, talk about them behind their back, or do the honorable thing and accept them and continue to work with them and show the love of Christ to them. Does that sound strangely similar to what Dungy said he'd do? It should.
8 months ago
yes the bible does not advocate slavery as we know it, but thats my point! You can't take the damn book literally! Which is why when people use the bible to defend their homophobia it makes no sense.
8 months ago
Just to point out what seems to be the obvious, but earlier Mark commented, "How another person decides to live his or her life is none of my business and if I encounter them in a professional setting, my only concern is how they perform their job." Isn't that what Dungy means when he says if the player were good he'd have no problem with it? If the player is playing well (i.e. doing well at his job), Dungy says he's fine with it. Lets not call people who handle differences the same way we do prejudice shall we? Otherwise you're in the same boat.
from 8 months ago
Agreed, but what I find troubling here is Dungy says that he would more or less preach to his employee.
I'm not a religious person, but I know people whose lives have turned around (for the better) because they found religion. I am glad Dungy has a deep personal faith. I'm sure it helped him not only when he lost his son but at other points in his life. That's great. But that doesn't mean he should be preaching to his players.
One thing we all have in common is that we are trying find our way in this world. For some people, religion helps, for some it is spirituality without religion, for still others it is neither of these. The fact that Dungy's religious convictions have helped him on his path has no inherent relevance to those who work for him.
8 months ago
Let's point out something else that's obvious. In the same breath Dungy says he doesn't proselytize to his players AND that he would tell a player what he thinks and what the Bible says (or what HE says it says) about homosexuality.
So which is it Tony? Telling a player what you think about their homosexuality and what YOU say the Bible says about it, when it has absolutely NOTHING to do with their job, IS proselytizing.
I'm a devout Christian. I go to church every time the doors are open but fundamentalists who shove their religious beliefs down other people's throats drive me up a wall especially when they use their celebrity as a pulpit. Let's not forget that athlete's are also the MOST superstitious people around. I think that's why the judgmentalist form of faith seems to be so rampant among the ranks of professional sports. I find that ironic when you consider the lifestyle and conduct of some of these sports saints when the cameras aren't rolling. It's a bit like the disparity between the actual versus the virtual lives of some of our "family values" politicians.
Tony should stick to coaching and leave relgious counciling and non job related moral judgements to priests, pastors, imams and rabbis.
8 months ago
Homosexuality IS a choice, if it was something you were born with, then it would be written in your DNA. Since there is no facts proving that there is a "homosexuality gene", you must go with the facts. You are only born with something if it is programmed in your DNA, and since there is no proof of a "homosexuality gene", it is NOT something you are born with. However, I do feel that the way someone was raised can heavily influence whether or not they are gay, but ultimately, people decide that they will be homosexual, and until someone shows me solid evidence that a "homosexuality gene" exists, I will continue to see it that way. To further back up my point, just look at Anne Heche, if she was genetically programmed to be a lesbian, how come she DECIDED to be straight? And that is just one example of ONE famous person, I'm sure if you do the research you would find a large number of people who have converted from homosexuality to heterosexuality, how could they make that CHOICE if they were born that way?
from 8 months ago
really? You're also aware that biologically, at a genetic, DNA level there is no scientific difference between whites, blacks, asians etc..
In science there is one race, the human race.
from 8 months ago
So your telling me that there is a "homosexuality gene"? No, your not, okay nevermind.
There are genes that decide your skin color, hair color, eye color, height, metabolism etc, etc...
There is no difference between blacks, whites, asians, hispanics or any other race at the basic Human DNA level, but there are most certainly more genetics that are involved in the human make up than just the basics, the basics are what give us the BASIC (hints why they are the basics) human traits such as our ability to walk upright and the use of our thumbs.
I'm not saying a "homosexuality gene" doesn't exist, but there is no proof of one, and until it is PROVEN, I will continue to believe that it is a choice. Doesn't matter if it is a choice that you were strongly pushed to by your surroundings, it is still a CHOICE, until further notice.
If you use the basics of critical thinking, fact and opinion are VASTLY different, as of right now it is someone's opinion on whether or not homosexuals are born that way........it is not a FACT.
from 8 months ago
It is a FACT that homosexual individuals exist -- not only in humankind but around the animal kingdom generally. See the book, BIOLOGICAL EXUBERANCE: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity by Bruce Bagemihl. St. Martins Press 1999.
How they come to be is still being studied. The most plausible theory is hormonal development before birth. We all begin life in female form; babies with the XY chromosome get strong doses of hormones to alter their bodies in a male direction. The hormones come minute by minute as the child grows in the womb, according to the mother's mood and diet. So there is no ideal form, just a process of development that produces viable offspring. A few babies are born with genitals whose form is between the standard male and female. It's plausible to consider that people with homosexual tendencies have brains wired somewhere between the standard male and female possibilities. Are they flawed or imperfect specimens? Nope, just variations on the human model.
It's possible that genes play some role in this aspect of development. That's far from being established yet. We know about the hormonal thing; it's part of the story of every one of us.
Choice come in how we play the human hand we are dealt. Intersex babies are often altered surgically to RESEMBLE the gender they seem most like, a choice of physicians and parents. (Often to the child's detriment -- choices are made that turn out to be misguided. And surgery that gives a more socially acceptable look can leave the parts without feeling.) People attracted to members of their own sex have to decide what to do about it. In the West, one can pair off and even raise children, be just another unit of society. In Iran this is not an option. Despite all the right-wing and evangelical pressure to keep gays in the closet and to deny information about sexuality to young people when they most need it, I think that openness and freedom prove to be the superior options.
8 months ago
Interesting that slavery in Bible times wasn't what 19th century slave owners were defending on scriptural grounds. But it is also screamingly obvious that the same-sex behavior condemned in scripture is not the experience of gay and lesbian people today. The Bible condemns what its writers see as weird actions by people not playing a proper Hebrew or Christian game -- it has no conception of loving relations in same sex couples. (It has no conception of a round earth or biology, either.) So if the Bible is off the hook on the subject of slavery, let's not quote it on sexual orientation either.
8 months ago
Even if you are born with homosexual tendencies, you don't have to act on it. The homosexual is choosing that behavior.
8 months ago
Do some of you actually think it is a choice? Do you believe that people would make a choice towards homosexuality so they can be beaten in hate crimes. Do you think they would make that choice so they could be disowned by their families. Do you think they would make that choice so as to be chastised by people who are so shallow to judge them.
I do not believe it is a choice..........too many harships to endure....
8 months ago
I don't give a damn about the bible or any other comments . I only know that if homosexuality was ment to be the normal way of life , then we wouldn't be here,,,right !! I know you are sick as hell if screwing your boyfriends and girlfriends is your way to get turned on . Maybe if you are married you screw your wifes brother and his friends as well , then your wife next and her girlfriends and then her brothers and sisters. Where the hell would it stop ?? Homo's are just plain lazy and most don't want to spend the time or money to attract a girl into a really meaningfull relationship and the same with Lezbo's ,,,,you are the SICKEST FORM OF ANIMALS ON EARTH !!
No you sure as hell don't have a choice as far as I'm concerned you twisted sick morons.
from 8 months ago
While your comment is obviously filled with rage, hatred, and ignorrance, I partially agree with you. If homosexuality was the norm, there would be no human species.
Hey Roy, have you ever heard that often the most guilty is the first to point the finger. It's called projection. I'd google it.
8 months ago
WOW I didn't know about this
8 months ago
I know what I am ,,,I don't need to google anything to find out what I believe in. Also , you can call me anything you want except a Homosexual and by the way it's the Homo's that are ignorrant not me,,,I'm from the Normal side.!!!!
8 months ago
I think it's funny to watch non-Christians try to interpret the Bible and get it totally wrong. In the Old Testament, sure it says all kinds of stuff about eating shellfish and things like that in the same breath that it talks about homosexuality. The only problem is that homosexuality is again referenced by Paul in the New Testament as a sin, after the death of Christ, whereas that other stuff is not. So it's not even a valid point--the Old Testament is a bunch of laws and the New Testament is forgiveness from sins, and homosexuality is listed as a sin.
Dungy is a classy guy and his pause is, as someone said up there, his uncomfortable response to a question designed to trap him into making a controversial statement. I'm glad he said what he felt.
I know that some of you aren't christians, and that's your choice, but as Christians we are called to spread the Gospel. That's all Dungy is saying, and it's no secret what his beliefs are to anybody.
Tony Dungy is a respectable man and the classiest coach in the NFL. He still would treat the player respectfully, did you forget that's what he ACTUALLY SAID, not his body language! I am disappointed that this has become a hate forum on the Bible and what it says on homosexuality. Coach Dungy will always have my utmost respect.
from 8 months ago
So according to you we are to completely ignore the old testament and it's teachings? Or shouldn't we? Ya know, having pre-marital sex is a sin too. I'm sure more than a handful of his players engage in that activity. Do you think Dungy brings up the bible to those players?
What makes one sin worse than another?
here's the problem you get into when you use the bible to defend your view.
I am not anti-christian. i was born and raised catholic. I have no problem with someone believing in something greater than themselves. I just don't feel you should use the teachings of god as an enabler for intolerance and hatred.
from 8 months ago
Excellent reading jack...but you neglected to figure out what I actually said. Where did i say to throw out the Old Testament? Nobody who is a decent Christian would say that. There are however a ton of laws in the Old Testament that are not discussed after the death of Christ, whereas many others are discussed, such as drunkenness, adultery, and yes, homosexuality (I Corinthians 6:9-10). Christ came to die and redeem us since nobody can follow the laws of the Old Testament, but that doesn't mean there is no sin. At least, that's what MY Bible says.
For Coach Dungy to say these things is for him to speak about his faith, which by the way is protected by the First Amendment. We shouldn't even be having this discussion.
8 months ago
Please tell me Roy was joking....
from 8 months ago
I fear not...WOW...it's gays like him...i mean guys like him that give the anti-gay movement a lot of credibility. (That's a joke.) I can't believe sexual orientation is actually an important issue to some people. Why should I care again?
The fact that people put so much weight on a book that has been translated multiple times over thousands of years through several languages is mind boggling. I believe you can get a general sense of goodness and decency from the Bible, but to use it as a source of criticism and hatred I think is missing the point. And the fact that someone as intelligent as Tony Dungy would feel unable to use his own common sense on the issue is surprising.
8 months ago
Jack,,,,just another thing while I am on my computer at this moment. This is not the place for this topic and shouldn't be on a Football Forum ! Everyone has their own views I'm sure but we could leave this out of this sport as I am sure there is a place for it elsewhere............
from 8 months ago
Roy, so we're only allowed to discuss sports regarding scores, and stats? There's a lot more to sports than just the numbers.
8 months ago
i would have agree with everything William said, I am sincerely disappointed in this article and in the way in which Dungy's words and actions are interpreted. They asked him a question and he simply stated his opinion based on the Bible, God's holy word. What is the problem? The worst part is the fact that this question was asked just for the purpose of trapping him into a controversial topic because he makes it clear he is a Christian and a believer in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. Isn't this a football forum?
from 8 months ago
Bob Costas asked the question because Bob Costas doesn't throw softball questions. Dungy has appeared at and publicly endorsed homophobic organizations.
Do i believe there is actual malice in Tony Dungy's words? No. Would he commit a crime against someone just for being gay? I doubt it. Does the fact that he uses the bible as his shield for being a bigot make it okay? Absolutely not and that's the point of the article.
Is Tony Dungy a coach of an NFL team? That makes it relevant here.
8 months ago
William, you couldn't be more right! glad you said it so perfectly. Dungy was trapped into a question and even if he decided to pass on the question, the results would have still been the same. People would still be making forums bashing Coach Dungy. As a Christian, I also find it extremely funny how non believers can not interpret the Bible and instead make themselves look foolish you Pagans. The Old Testament is full of Laws that cannot all be abide today and it is ok since the Lord Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins. BUT the New Testament does state ways you will not be accepted into Heaven and guess what, homosexuality is one of them. Check it up, for example 1 Corinthians versus 9 & 10. Good luck to you.
from 8 months ago
part of the point of the article was to express why is homophobia okay, but racism isn't?
If a white coach came out and openly supported anti-black organizations, he wouldn't be allowed to work in the league.
If Jon Gruden, paused on a question regarding having a black player, he'd be fired.
Why the double standard? Oh cuz the bible says so. Well as i pointed out the bible says a lot of other awful things, yet we ignore thoses. That's the point of the article.
8 months ago
I think in psychology they call this "projection", as in, you seem to be projecting yourself onto coach Dungy in this case. For someone claiming to be so open-minded and non-judgmental, you're sure coming across pretty close-minded and judgmental towards coach Dungy and people that think like him. So, if he were "sane" and/or "intelligent" he'd believe the same thing you believe? Is that how it works in your world?
I couldn't care less about anyone's sexual orientation either. But I'm also aware enough to realize that not everyone shares my views, and unless I'm absolutely flawless, I'm in no place to tell others that their values and beliefs are any worse than my own. So the guy believes that living the life of a homosexual is "wrong" - that doesn't make him any better or worse than you. It just makes him different. And as far as I can tell, his belief is just that - a belief. As far as I know, he's not hurting anyone.
from 8 months ago
You're right, he has the right to believe what he wants to as I've stated. I just think he shouldn't hide behind the bible, when the bible is full of other passages that he doesn't support. So he just picks and chooses what's good and what's not?
Maybe it is a bit close minded to think that having tolerance for others isn't sane.
I just find it ironical that a man who no doubt faced discrimination in his past and even int he present, would continue to discriminate against others.
8 months ago
I guess I'm failing to see where he has actively discriminated against homosexuals. Discrimination is a behavior, not a belief. You can have beliefs without acting upon them. As you mentioned, Dungy can believe what he wants about homosexuality - it is not discrimination until, for instance, it costs someone their spot on the roster - or it costs someone a tryout with his team. If he has exhibited discriminatory behavior against a group, maybe I'm just missing it.
Furthermore, I never said or even implied that you are somehow protesting his right to believe what he wants. I said that you, in the process of professing your open-mindedness, are coming across as judgmental towards coach Dungy. That's why I call it projection. I refer to your statement:
"I m completely and utterly offended that Dungy paused to a question to which any sane, intelligent person would reply, I have no problem with it at all. '
Your statement implies to me that since he did not respond the same way you would (i.e. does not share your beliefs on homosexuality), he is somehow not sane or intelligent - or in the very least, he is less sane and/or intelligent than you. That comes across as extremely judgmental to me. Am I misinterpreting your statement? It seems pretty blunt to me.
8 months ago
What kinda cum-catching fag would write an article like this?
from 8 months ago
thanks for proving my point =)
8 months ago
Even if it was a choice, that would be no reason to discriminate against homosexuals. When are we going to shed the baggage of our superstitious tribal ancestors?
8 months ago
Yeah, Mr Marchetti? This was one of the most terrible articles, about anything, that I've ever seen. You jump to about five conclusions, or five "effects," if you will, that you claim all stem from one cause.
You know what the worst part was? It was a terrible cause. You just said that because Tony Dungy stopped to think before he spoke and folded his arms (if you're asking who gives a damn about race, who gives a damn what someone does with their arms while they're talking?), he is a bigot. And then you criticized his religious beliefs.
Now I'm confused about something, Mr. Marchetti. You ranted for three paragraphs about how Tony Dungy shouldn't bring Biblical scripture into the picture, despite the fact that he didn't! You did, moron! All the accomplished Coach Dungy said was that he WOULD talk about the Bible, in the future tense. that is what we, the reader, are left to assume, anyway; you apparently didn't have the ability to quote the man, and had to start calling his words "blather"?
You're the only person being a bigot here, Mr. Marchetti, by voicing your opinion about people who have religious beliefs. I, obviously along with many others who have posted here, think yours is "an ignorant view of the world, but it's your absolute right as a human being to believe whatever the hell you want to believe."
This all beyond the fact that you also let us know how you really feel about the black people of America. You say in one sentence that it's no big deal that he's black, and that he did what he did. And then you criticize, paraphrase, and quote out of context the Bible (you could have at least done that for Dungy, the SUBJECT OF THE ARTICLE), saying how awful it is that it justified the mistreatment of black people by whites in the past. Did whites mistreat them or not? If they didn't then your an insane psychopath. If they did, then doesn't it make it a big feat for a black mean to prove that he has overcome that mistreatment, in any form, let alone on the stage of the National Football League?
By the way, I appreciate how you threw some profanity in there while discussing other people's opinions, too. It was a nice touch that really made us believe what you had to say.
In conclusion, let me recommend you learn a few things from a speech class or writer's course. I would suggest a community college, but frankly, I think that's a little advanced for you at the moment; try high-school again. Honestly, just because it didn't work out for you the first time doesn't mean it won't the second.
And please, before you slam me for making assumptions and criticizing your personal opinions, look in the mirror and remove the plank from your own eye. Hah, a Biblical reference; how ironic.
from 8 months ago
Did he stop and pause to answer any other question other than the one about homosexuals?
Nope.
when you have to choose your words carefully, there's usually a reason for that.
where in the article did I use profanity? Unless you consider "hell" or "ignorant" as curse words.
Here was the point of the article, and as you eluded to, it was probably my lack of writing ability which casued the confusion.
In America you can be homophobic, as tony Dungy truly is, and that is considered okay. Why is this? Because you can always point to a verse in leviticus which calls homosexuality an abomination. So that makes it okay.
So why is that considered okay, yet being openly racist isn't?
And as far as my views about blacks in America? I thought i basically pointed out that it's time we stop viewing people as blacks, and whites, and whatever. However, every time you point out "well he's the first black to do this....." "he's the first latino to do this...." you just keep bringing up the differences between us.
I never said the bible justified the mistreatment of blacks. I'm saying people USED the bible to justify it. Again, as they use the bible to justify their homophobia.
8 months ago
Since this thread has seemed to have spun off in all different directions, I'll just throw this quick little message/note in here because I'm no longer worried about derailing the conversation.
A quick message to my Christian brothers who are posting messages in this thread. Please be careful to not talk bad or put down those individuals posting in this thread who are non-Christians. Saying it is "funny" that they cannot interpret the Bible correctly or referring to them as Pagans is hardly a message of love. What are the greatest two commandments? Love the Lord thy God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and love thy neighbor as thyself. Jesus loved those who didn't believe in Him and we are called to do the same. You might find it interesting that the number one group people are afraid to talk to is Christians. They fear judgment and rightfully so, because too often we are quick to judge and condemn. Remember, God doesn't love us more than he does them. We sin just like non-believers and God hates our sin as much as theirs. If you truly believe in Jesus and what He said, you should have an urgency about you to show non-believers His love and share His message of grace and forgiveness. Do as coach Dungy does and more importantly as Jesus did and show them love, not hate.
8 months ago
I'm not sure what gives you the idea that "America" considers homophobia "okay". After all, isn't Dungy's "homophobia" the entire reason that this interview is even a story? Consider the fact that Tony Dungy disagreeing with homosexual behavior is newsworthy on a large scale - if America were "okay" with homophobia, would this be newsworthy? My hunch is that it wouldn't.
I hesitate to directly attribute the term "homophobia" to coach Dungy, as the way in which you use it seems to imply hate and/or intolerance and I don't want my words to be misunderstood. I personally think that Dungy is simply averse to homosexual behaviors. Dungy is a self-professed man of faith, which to me says that he has no hate towards anyone, including homosexuals. He loves all people. He simply believes that their behavior is immoral. And who are we to say he's wrong for believing that?
I find it amusing that you take so much exception to Dungy "choosing his words carefully". If more people chose their words carefully, especially when discussing a sensitive subject such as this, I think that people would make many fewer stupid comments. Don't you? How many people out there have been fired for something they said publicly? There are certainly many public figures out there that probably wish they chose their words more carefully at some point in their lives. I interpreted Dungy's pause as "This is a sensitive topic - I don't want to say anything insensitive or stupid right now". You seem to have interpreted it very differently.
As I stated earlier, you seem to be projecting just as much as you've accused other commenters of projecting.
from 8 months ago
Again my problem with what Tony Dungy said was that he basically finds homosexuality wrong because it's in the bible. Again, there are many passages in the bible that Dungy doesn't seem to follow. So why pick and choose?
the reason you choose your words carefully is because you might say something "wrong". If Dungy simply believed it was against the nature of god, but he had no problem with it. Then why not say "Bob, what you do with your life is none of my business." Simple. To the point. No problem.
I was born and raised catholic, and I too have been taught that homosexuality is a sin. But I came to my own conclusion that teaching intolerance, on any level, is wrong.
8 months ago
I think the reason he chose his words carefully is not to avoid "saying something wrong" as you put it - I think he wanted to choose his words carefully so that he answered the question clearly and in a way that his words would not be taken out of context and used to paint him as some kind of...well, some kind of intolerant homophobe - I guess he failed on that one, huh?
There is no right or wrong on this subject, so I doubt he was worried about being wrong. What you call intolerance, he calls promoting family values. What makes him less sane or intelligent than you?
Dungy also said that if he had a gay player, he would show him respect and that there'd be a spot on his team for the player if he were a good enough player. I don't see what's so intolerant in that.
Regarding your accusations of cherry-picking which scriptures to abide by - I'm not here to defend him or explain why he is how he is - My original intent in joining this discussion was to point out the way in which you were coming across as judgmental and close-minded while preaching against that type of behavior. I'm not going to pretend to be some kind of theologian, and I'm not interested in any verses that people feel the need to cite - I don't know a ton about the Bible, but I do know that everyone interprets it differently.
8 months ago
Just because Tony Dungy doesn't agree with you, that instantaneously makes him a homophobe? Personally, I know that homosexuality is a sin and Tony Dungy does too. Dungy is a much better man than you could ever hope to be. Let's talk about what Belichick does that Dungy does not. He lies, he cheats, he's an A-HOLE to the media and an adulterer. Dungy is a family man, a great coach, a man of God and one of my heroes. I don't appreciate it when an ignorant moron like you who doesn't know his head from his butt makes an asinine comment like this. Dungy is right and while I'm not going to promote religion, I know that God disapproves of homosexuality (does Sodom and Gomorrah's fate ring a bell?) You're a Pats fan, that's all there is to it. Please don't make those of us in our country, such as Dungy and myself condone homosexualiy because it's wrong. Oh yes, incidentally I'm a Mormon and we upright people are mistreated for our religion when we've done nothing wrong. As for being a FAGGOT (no, I'm not sorry for that insult), there are certain parts of the world where that's a felony. I wish it was here. I'm out.
from 8 months ago
Mr. Anonymous is a good example of someone who perhaps should have chosen their words carefully. You didn't come off too bright in your response, Anonymous.
The first sentence in your response did bring up a valid question though. That's what I've been trying to get Jack to address. He begins the article by chastising Dungy for being close-minded and judgmental. He then proceeds to fail to practice what he preaches by implying that since Dungy doesn't share his views on homosexuality, he is somehow not sane or intelligent.
from 8 months ago
Jeff, I think we could go back and forth on this for hours lol
perhaps you are correct, those of us who tend to think we are "enlightened" by embracing anything and anyone, do chastize those who don't. perhaps that is close mindedness.
I suppose it is naive to think we could live in a world without intolerance. That is the only thing i can't get behind. In my opinion if you prejudge someone because of what they are
I'm not anti-god, I'm anti-religion. Minus religion, what other reason would tony dungy have for not approving of someone's gay life style? I doubt he'd come up with any. And that's the heart of my argument. That is the heart of close-mindedness. He is letting a book decide for him what is right and what is wrong.
To Anonymous:
Sodom and Gomorrah?? Tell me anonymous. Have you ever had pre-marital sex? Ever worked on the sabbath? Ever lied to anyone? Ever download music for free? Aren't those all considering sins the same as homosexuality?
The fact that Tony Dungy feels being gay is immoral and wrong, makes him a homophobe. I didn't make the comment, Tony Dungy did. Just like if you feel that all italians are mobsters, or all blacks are criminals makes you ignorrant at best, racist at worst.
And I hate the Patriots about as much as you do. I'm a Bears fan and I live in Chicago. Bill Billichik is a prick. However, I've never heard him come out and say anything derogatory about an entire group of people.
8 months ago
Couple things to try and summarize:
1. I think the parallel you keep trying to make with racists vs. homophobes doesn't exactly fit. Maybe I'm completely wrong in this assumption, but don't people that oppose homosexuality on religious grounds oppose the behaviors that homosexuals engage in? In other words, don't they oppose gay sex? A black person or Italian person cannot control their race. While it's arguable that a gay person cannot control their sexual orientation - I happen to think they cannot - they most certainly can control their behavior. Dungy and his ilk believe it is an immoral act. My point is - while I basically agree with you that what people do in private doesn't impact me - I'm in no place to dismiss Dungy's belief as any worse, less sane, or less intelligent than my own. To do so would go against the tenets of open-mindedness.
2. You accused him of discrimination. I do not believe it is discriminatory for Dungy to hold these beliefs. Like I said, discrimination is a behavior, not a belief. It would be discriminatory for him to let these beliefs influence or dictate his behavior toward homosexuals. From all accounts he has said he would treat a homosexual with the same respect he would treat a heterosexual.
3. The fact that you just stated that you are "anti-religion" shows that you wrote your piece with a tremendous amount of bias toward people of faith. I am actually very similar to you in one regard - I'm not religious in the slightest. But to go around touting yourself as this open-minded, all-embracing, politically correct type of guy - and then say, "Oh, but I'm anti-religion"...it's blatant hypocrisy. I'm not saying it's wrong of you to be anti-religious. I'm just saying that maybe you're not as all-embracing as you thought. You obviously have prejudices towards people of faith. So just get it out in the open next time.
You're right - we could go back and forth for hours - There's no need to keep it up if you don't care to, but it's fun to talk without people resorting to cussing and name-calling.
from 8 months ago
1. so by controlling one's behavior, from a gay perspective, what do you mean? They shouldn't date, fall in love, have sex? I am dismissing Tony Dungy's belief because in a modern, plural society, to think having sex with someone of the same gender is immoral and against the preachings of god, is to me ridicilous. does that make me close minded, i guess it does. I can't wrap my head around it.
2. Isn't discrimination a direct by product of prejudice? Has he discriminated? Not to my knowledge. Is it entire possible that he would based upon his beliefs? Unfortunately yes.
3. Yes I think religion is bad and of course I'm biased, it's a subjective article :) i wasn't trying to be objective.
I think religion pits people against each other. My faith vs your faith. My beliefs are right your beliefs are wrong. it's dangerous. When drawing a picture of the prophet Muhammad has people marching in the streets and screaming for someone to be killed, there's definitely a problem. I'm not sure how me being anti-religion makes me a hypocrite. I consider myself open minded, but i'm definitely not politically correct. I don't think what dungy said was politically incorrect. I think it was naive and dumb. Religion in my opinion makes people close minded. Like I said, do you think Tony Dungy would feel homosexuality is wrong if it wasn't written in the bible?
Well let me ask you something, because we're way off topic at least the topic I intended the article to be about. If tony dungy was white and bob costas asked him "what if you had a white player on your team?" and he paused, and answered with "well i'd tell him what I think and what the bible says".
Would he still have a job? I'll save you the time, no he wouldn't.
I don't see the difference between homophobia and racism. You can't control what race you are, and I don't believe you can control what sexual orientation you are. If you could, at what point did you choose to be straight?
8 months ago
Jack i am sad that you feel the way you do about religion. I will pray for you, in all sincerity, because that breaks my heart.
With that being said, Dungy would not say that the Bible says anything about being white or black or latino, because the Bible doesn't talk about those things. It does condemn homosexuality (not just in Leviticus) though and that's why Dungy said what he said, which by the way was a lot better than what many people, Christian or not, would say.
And Dungy didn't say these things because it's written in a book. As a Christian, Dungy believes, as I do, that the Bible is the infallible Word of God, that the Scripture is God-breathed. To go against Scripture is to go against the teachings of God Himself. As for the other rules of the Old Testament, I can't explain that one to you--I don't have a theology degree. But I can say that Jesus came to take away all of those rules that are strictly from the Old Testament.
Dungy was just practicing the teachings of the church, which is based on the Bible, which is straight from God. That's it.
from 8 months ago
No need to pray for me, like I said I was born and raised catholic. I went to 8 years of catholic grammar school and 4 years of catholic high school. I was exposed to it for twelve years and came to the conclusion that it wasn't for me. And as you know, man's free will is god's greatest gift is it not?
Of course the bible doesn't say anything of blacks, latinos etc... I know that. The point is, homophobia is intolerance. If god is all loving and all caring, why would he condone such a thing? Doesn't he love everyone? Aren't we all his children?
And a question to you William, pre-marital sex is a sin. Adultery is a sin. Do you think there's a chance that some of the Colt's commit such sins?
8 months ago
1. You should know what a behavior is. It's an observable activity. So yes, gay sex is certainly a behavior. I'm no psychologist, but my best guess is that falling in love falls under "emotional" as opposed to behavioral.
2. Sure, discrimination is a product of prejudice. But that doesn't make it a necessary product, though. Like I've said several times, you can hold a belief and stop right there without externally acting upon it. He can believe that gay sex is wrong and still show homosexuals the same respect that he shows other people. So while the answer to your question is yes, it is possible for him to discriminate - it's a pointless question, because the answer is yes for everybody. No one is immune from being prejudiced.
3. You were hypocritical in this case because you stated that you embrace all things and all people, that you basically consider everyone as equals; that you're as open-minded and welcoming as they come. Then you single out one line of thought in your article and dismiss it as "ignorant" and later state that you are biased against people of faith.
There - I just explained where you were hypocritical - it was very clearly explained, and there shouldn't even be an argument about that point anymore.
As far as your last paragraph - it makes me wonder how closely you read my previous response. I told you that I believe people cannot control their sexual orientation. I think I typed it about 10 minutes ago.
8 months ago
Jeff, my last paragraph was just in response to you stating that being gay isn't a race. so i answered that you can't control your race anymore than your orientation.
So tell me:
Would it be ignorant to believe that the world is flat?
Is it dumb to think the world is only 6000 years old?
how about believing in the tooth fairy?
Those are beliefs, and they are all wrong.
A belief, hell an opinion can be wrong. And they can be stupid. :)
8 months ago
I understand your last paragraph better now - but as I said, homosexuals can control their behaviors just like people of all races and nationalities can. Racism has nothing to do with an individual's behavior. It is an inherent hate. Those that "oppose" homosexuality do so based on the sexual behaviors of that group. There is a difference between orientation and behavior. One can be controlled.
The words belief and opinion are basically interchangeable. A belief, by definition, cannot be scientifically proven. It can be based on fact, faith, whatever. But it cannot be scientifically proven. Once it can be, it becomes knowledge. It's been proven that the world is not flat. If someone tells me they believe it's flat, I wouldn't necessarily call them ignorant, but I'd call them dishonest.
8 months ago
Jack, either you didn't actually read my post, and settled instead for replying to what you thought I would say, or you just couldn't handle my logic and decided to ignore it. I think this because I obviously said, and I'll say it again, Tony Dungy cannot be considered homophobicbased on that interview; your conclusion was complete bologna. He simply said (trusting, of course, you're paraphrase) that he would explain his feelings on homosexuality based on what the Bible said.
You know what that says to me? He's not a homosexual himself! That doesn't make him a homophobe! Is this an absolute, black or white issue? Either your gay and good or homophobic and bad? I think you'll agree with me, that would be ridiculous. Thus, what makes you think he's homophobic? You mentioned that he said that if the player was good, he wouldn't mind. This was OBVIOUSLY said by Dungy as a joke, because if he was serious, you would have slandered him for that as well. Thus, he literally doesn't feel too strongly against homosexuals, otherwise he wouldn't have joked about them that way!
I have another thought for you, as to why Tony Dungy folded his arms and thought for a moment before answering what you yourself described as a tough question (Costas throws hardball questions, right?). Maybe, JUST MAYBE he wanted to make sure he didn't say something stupid and insensitive like a Tim Hardaway or a Don Imus. MAYBE he wanted to make sure he didn't give people like you any opportunity to misuse his quote, and twist what he said, and turn it against him.
You know what else? He succeeded. That's why numbskulls like you can't quote him. You have to paraphrase him, mock him, and slander him, because he didn't do anything wrong. You have to lie to make it look like he did something wrong. And you do it through your teeth, and you can't apologize or reason about it. Can you?
8 months ago
First off, I hope I don't seem too long winded, and I hope you will listen to what I have to say, and reply with reasoning. Anyway, here are some more thoughts I have.
Honestly Jack, stepping aside from your article on Dungy and our argument there, I must say that I think some of your standpoints and perspectives have the right idea, and the right intentions. But you've got to realize that when your intolerant of intolerant people, you're being just as intolerant.
On top of that, and getting back on track, you picked a terrible battle; Tony Dungy wasn't being intolerant; he was standing by what he believed and stated that in a REPLY TO A QUESTION. He's not forcing that viewpoint on anyone else, and he doesn't even force his religious views on anyone else, including his players. I can't help but wonder if you simply chose him as a target because he beat the Bears last year? It honestly doesn't make any sense.
Remember also that there are NO ABSOLUTES in this world; something else I assume you will agree with on principle. Just because he's not gay doesn't make Tony Dungy a homophobe. Just because Tony Dungy doesn't believe people should be gay (and there are more than just religious arguments to back up that viewpoint) doesn't mean that he thinks gay people should suffer in any form of any kind. It also doesn't mean that he should lie about what he believes in during an interview with Bob Costas. It was an opinion in a reply to a question that he forced on no one.
Imagine, for a moment, that he didn't say ANYTHING. How would you have then interpreted that, if Bob Costas asked him the question, and he ignored it completely, saying nothing. Would that have been better? He wouldn't have been forcing his viewpoint on anyone, that's for sure. And yet, by the logic that says folding your arms and thinking before speaking can only mean one thing, you still would have considered such a response as intolerant, or homophobic!
8 months ago
Usually people that project are suppressing anxiety or guilt about something. Maybe Jack is a closet homosexual and feels guilty about it, as it is in direct violation of his Catholic upbringing. Maybe he's afraid his family and/or friends might disown him if they find out. Or maybe he's just embarrassed about the time he spent an evening with a male prostitute.
from 8 months ago
anonymous, I really appreciate your intelligent response, it gives your argument a lot of credibility.
You need to learn what projection is. I am calling Tony Dungry a bigot. Which he is. If I were projecting, that would be because I was a bigot. I don't consider myself a bigot. I find those who are intollerant of other peoples life styles ignorrant. I don't find their life style wrong, and think they're going to hell.
8 months ago
i've read all the comments - it has been explained to you several times and in very clear terms how you have projected yourself onto tony dungy. if you are incapable of understanding it, try reading the comments again.
you do realize that a man can disagree with someone or something and still be tolerant of it, don't you? i disagree with many people on many things, and i still tolerate them. i have drinks with them, i shake their hands, i do business with them.
likewise, dungy can believe whatever he wishes to believe about homosexuals and still tolerate them. to reflexively label him a "bigot", "homophobe", or "ignorant" because he doesn't share your view(s) makes you the ignorant one. you are quite stupid if you are unable to follow all of this. it's being spelled out for you very clearly.
perhaps you should attend a class or two on tolerance. try a 3-2-1 shadow exercise or something. learn to see outside of your own perspective once in awhile. if you do these exercises successfully, you might eventually discover the true reason behind your projection.
8 months ago
Thank you very much, Anonymous. Now that you've labeled it in a way that I was apparently unable to, spelling the WHOLE ISSUE OUT CLEARLY AND OBVIOUSLY FOR ALL WHO CAN READ, I fully expect Jack to COMPLETELY IGNORE YOUR COMMENTS, LIKE HE'S DOING TO MINE.
There Jack, does that motivate you to to attempt to respond, or even (and maybe I shouldn't go this far) reason with us? Please, unlike last time, read what we said (like we took the time to read your article, what you said) BEFORE you reply.
Thank you so much.
By the way, latest Anonymous here ... Get an account; I want to be your friend. (Do they have friends here? 'S worth a shot).
8 months ago
maybe i'll create my own account and write an article all about jack m's bigot-like tendencies revealed in this article and throughout its comments.
article title: "Jack M. is an Intolerant, Judgmental Fool with Bigot-like Qualities"
8 months ago
Sounds like an excellent plan; that is, of course, unless I beat you too it :D
I find it interesting that he seems to have completely left the message board on his own article. Has he given up? Have we created an enlightened, changed man who is simply too prideful to admit it?
Assent through silence, right? It must be. After all, he's either on our side or on theirs. There's no middle ground, and we won't take no for an answer. Either your a perfectly passive individual who has no effect on anything or anyone, or WE HATE YOU; ain't that right, Anonymous? ;)
(here, let's try this:) What do you think, Jack?
8 months ago
Anonymous, I was answering another anonymous' posts where he said i was projecting my homosexuality onto Tony Dungy. I'm not gay, and I wasn't calling Tony Dungy gay. I'm calling him a bigot.
What do I think?
you're right. I'm intolerant of intolerance.
8 months ago
jack - there's one comment you've avoided that i was hoping you'd respond to:
you do realize that a person can hold core beliefs - in this case, that homosexual behavior is immoral - and still be tolerant of people that defy or disagree with those beliefs...right?
republicans and democrats have core beliefs about how to run a country - many of those beliefs are diametric opposites - yet they tolerate one another.
pro-life and pro-choice advocates have core beliefs about abortion - yet they tolerate one another.
"gun nuts" and "gun control nuts" have core beliefs regarding firearms - yet they tolerate one another.
homosexuals and people of faith have core beliefs about what defines moral behavior - yet they tolerate one another.
sure, there are exceptions to every rule. but by and large, all of those statements are true.
are you getting it yet? do you disagree that two people or groups of people can disagree on core beliefs and still tolerate one another? or is it simply not possible? if you believe that people can disagree and still tolerate one another, then what exactly has tony dungy said or done regarding homosexuals that would lead you to label him "intolerant", "ignorant", and "bigot"?
if you don't believe it's possible, i think you need to reconsider who the ignorant one is.
from 8 months ago
Of course I agree with what you are saying. People can believe whatever they want as I wrote, it's their right as human beings to do so. I wasn't arguing that two different groups of people cannot tolerate one another. There was rampant racism in baseball when Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier, and some of his teammates tolerated it, mainly because he was a good player. But does that make it right to still hold the belief that black's were inferior? I don't think it does. Those white players were still bigots were they not?
someone stated before that a belief or an opinion can't be wrong. Yes it can. As I mentioned above, believing the earth is flat is not only wrong, it's stupid. Believing in the tooth fairy? Believing a gay life style is wrong? Believing whites are superior? Those are all beliefs, which are ignorant, and don't belong in a modern society.
the main point of my article which obviously, we've strayed from, was that it is okay for Tony Dungy to basically admit to thinking homosexuality is wrong. I don't think we're arguing about what he believes.
and the reason it seems to be okay is because the bible says it. which it does. i pointed out that it says a lot of other things that Tony Dungy doesn't seem to openly chastise. for instance pre-marital sex. i imagine some of his players engage in it, do you think he talks to them about what the bible says?
it's okay to say something wrong about the gay community but if a white coach said something about the black community there would be massive public pressure to fire that coach. (i.e Imus' nappy headed hos comment)
Why is that?
Some have stated well it's a choice to be gay, and that's why it's different. I disagree with that. If it were a choice than there would be a point when straight people decided to be straight. i don't recall making that choice.
So yes, I agree with you. But holding an antiquated view on any group of people as "immoral", is still, in my humble opinion, ignorance.
8 months ago
Geeze, Jack, these guys are right. You're totally not even arguing, or reasoning any more. You're just a broken record repeating the same thing over and over again, despite how silly we're making you look.
Do you realize you COMPLETELY IGNORED two of my posts in a row?! And then ignored Anonymous' interesting and possibly correct assessment your perspective?! And then made something up about "sorry, I didn't get it, let's move on to an easier question please." Why did you do that? Do you only have time for half the comments?
If there is a reason behind you only arguing against half the comments on the board, please tell us what it is, right away. I'm only suggesting it to you because your left looking like a FOOL when you only pick and choose what comments you think you can embarrass. Don't you realize, Jack, I'm trying to help you! :D
The fact is, you've pretty much lost all credibility here, and you don't even know it. Until you can respond to criticism - in whatever form you want, by all means; just respond to it, for heaven's sake - you will continue to not be taken seriously.
If you can't take the time to pay attention to the feedback, you might as well not bother taking the time to write the articles, because you're going to lose your audience in the blink of an eye.
BEYOND ALL OF THAT, the issue with Homosexuality is not something you can argue is an absolute, at least not without contradicting yourself. I will quote a previous comment of yours to prove it FOR ALL TO SEE:
"While your comment is obviously filled with rage, hatred, and ignorrance, I partially agree with you. If homosexuality was the norm, there would be no human species."
Now, let me use your own metaphor against you. If everyone was black, or asian, or white, or any one race, would there still be people? Of course. Thus, your metaphor doesn't not carry over. It's a simple twist, a spin to make homosexuality (the leading cause of AIDS in the U.S.) seem a million times more respectable and accepted than it is in this reality. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that homosexuality shouldn't be allowed, or anything like that. After all, it can't be proven to be too malignant to the human race to be acceptable. All I'm saying is that there are two sides to that coin; it also can't be proven to be perfectly acceptable and tolerated by human standards, due to the fact that it DOES HAVE AN EFFECT ON PEOPLE.
Meanwhile, Africans, Asians, Caucasians, Hispanics, etc. are all PEOPLE THEMSELVES, NOT a feeling, be it spiritually or chemically based, a lifestyle, or a choice. If no one was allowed to be homosexual, lives WOULD NOT BE LOST. If people were not allowed to be Jewish, for instance, lives would be and WERE LOST.
Also, just to rub it in a little bit, you sit here and contradict YOUR ENTIRE ARGUMENT in this comment, when you admit that, correctly and honestly, it's okay for Tony Dungy to not approve of homosexuality, as long as he's tolerant of those who feel otherwise. Here's you're quote: "You're right, he has the right to believe what he wants to as I've stated."
So what is your beef? The only two things you've said in this whole conversation you've either recanted or self contradicted. We don't get it, Jack, and because you won't read or respond to half our comments (as I assume you'll do with this one. At most, you'll read it all and respond to the parts you like), we can't take you seriously.
UNLESS JACK RESPONDS TO OUR ARGUMENTS, I HEREBY MOVE THAT EVERYONE BOYCOTT THIS CONVERSATION AND ALL FUTURE ARTICLES WRITTEN BY JACK MARCHETTI, FOR HE DOES NOT WANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
from 8 months ago
Matthew, you wrote:
" I'm not saying that homosexuality shouldn't be allowed, or anything like that. After all, it can't be proven to be too malignant to the human race to be acceptable"
I'm sure the gay community is so happy that you think it should be allowed. They're not committing a crime man.
You wrote:
"homosexuality (the leading cause of AIDS in the U.S)" (and just to be a pain in the ass, HIV is the cause of AIDS.)
Anyway, are you living in the 80s? The fastest growing group of HIV infections in the United States are women between the ages of 20-40. It's extremely difficult to catch HIV through lesbian sex, so how else are they getting it? Perhaps drug use. Perhaps, heterosexual sex. The gay community got their act together in the 90s.
What affect has homosexuality had on you? How is it affecting you? Please explain.
You Wrote:
""Meanwhile, Africans, Asians, Caucasians, Hispanics, etc. are all PEOPLE THEMSELVES, NOT a feeling, be it spiritually or chemically based, a lifestyle, or a choice. If no one was allowed to be homosexual, lives WOULD NOT BE LOST. If people were not allowed to be Jewish, for instance, lives would be and WERE LOST.""
I have no idea what that means lol Are you saying that if there were no gays no lives would be lost? I'm assuming you're saying that from a procreation point of view. So if that were true, should we then say being sterile is wrong? You mention "were lost" and i'm guessing you're referring to the holocaust. Not sure if you know but twins, gays, gypsies, etc.. were also killed. It wasn't just jewish people. I'm not sure what your arguing in that paragraph.
You wrote:
"Also, just to rub it in a little bit, you sit here and contradict YOUR ENTIRE ARGUMENT in this comment, when you admit that, correctly and honestly, it's okay for Tony Dungy to not approve of homosexuality, as long as he's tolerant of those who feel otherwise. Here's you're quote: "You're right, he has the right to believe what he wants to as I've stated."
I'm sure Tony Dungy believe he is tolerant of homosexuals. I'm sure he truly does. Why would he have to quote the bible to them where the verse calls them an "abomination." How would you feel if someone told you "ya know Matthew, you're an alright guy, but an abomination!" Not exactly tolerance.
I'm sure I missed something again, it's 1am, i need sleep. Argue with you guys tomorrow :)
8 months ago
First off, Tony Dungy is black, and I think it's pretty important that we recognize how difficult it was for African Americans to be taken seriously enough to be given head coaching jobs. We can say that the color of his skin makes no difference to us, but that is exactly what made the difference to GMs doling out head coaching jobs. Racism was rampant in the NFL from its earliest days. This season marks 25 years since Doug Williams became the first black QB to start and win the Super Bowl and current African American QBs recognize how important he was to them. He works for the Bucs now and talks about how guys still come up to his before games to say thank you. Before him, it was a pipe dream.
Also, it's not over. The NFL has these ridiculous minority canididate rules, which is the only reason that Steelers head coach Mike Timlin was even interviewed for that job. He was considered a total long shot, but they had to have at least one minority candidate. Then he knocked the socks off the ownership and got a job that no one thought he would get.
So until we live in a world where racism isn't an issue anymore (and if you think we do you obviously missed the blatant racism involved in the media coverage of Sean Taylor's death. No one would have ever assumed that he had it coming if he were a white player) occasions like Dungy's win will be important historically. I doubt we even recognize the significance of it now.
So moving on, yeah, I think it sucks that he would inform an openly gay player on his team how he felt about his lifestyle. Even if you think being gay is not OK, that's not really your job as a coach to say so. There are just way bigger things to be worried about. I say this on the day that the Mitchell Report is to be released, and still wishing that Michael Vick's coach had been concerned enough to do something about his behavior, when all the signs pointed to the obvious fact that he was going to get in trouble. I wonder if he had been gay, if the coach would have been a little more involved. Hmmm.
I think that if you're a public figure you can say what you want, but you have to be prepared for the consequences. I think Tony Dungy seems pretty prepared, since this isn't the first time he said all this ( see an article I wrote here: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/707-NFL-Indianapolis_Colts-Discriminating_Choice_Tony_Dungy_s_Missed_Opportunity-070207). I think that there is a double standard because if a coach had said he wouldn't care if his player was black as long as he was good, he would definitely have been fired. But we're not there yet. The Women's movement was born out of sexism in the civil rights movement, and the gay rights movement took a lot of its cues from women's lib. Maybe in 20 years when athletes can be openly gay, we'll look back on it in the same way that people look at Quarterbacking or coaching and think how bizarre it is that thos jobs were once reserved for whites only.
But those of you who are saying he's not being discriminatory, I mean, he totally is. If there happens to be a gay player on the Colts, how do you think he feels about his coach? Just by definition Dungy is bigoted, and like most people who base their opinions on religion, he probably isn't going to change. I think it's really pathetic that people on this site are not intellegent enough to talk about this without resorting to name calling, and that people are claiming that they definitively know things about the roots or causes of being gay, when no one knows yet. It's seriously interesting to think about how sports are and have always been impacted by big issues of the times, and this is so clearly one of those examples. Dungy's comments may say a lot about him, but the comments on this article say just as much about sports fans. At the end of your day, if your team wins the Super Bwol I doubt you'll care if your QB goes home to celebrate with his boyfriend. And if you do, then you are not a real fan.
from 8 months ago
Sarah, I agree with what Matthew said (never thought i'd do that )about Sean Taylor. If a white player, with a history of violence, or gang activity, where to be shot dead, I think people would react the same way.
But I'm glad someone sees what I am saying here.