Tony Dungy Walks Freely into a Political Firestorm

Yes there is a difference. There is no reference to interracial marriage in the bible as being something that is forbidden. As for being "Gay" let alone marriage, please reference Romans Chapter 2

Reply

Mr. David J. Warner, I wonder if you would have nothing to say if your children were being picked up daily and exposed to people who do not believe that a man and woman are not the only way to have a family. It is really funny that people can comment on something that is not directly affecting their own family. Just as it is easy to decide to go war with another country and not have to send your own family. Let gay people come into your family and infuence your children and see how really comfortable your really are watching your son walk out your door intrusted to a gay man. I just wonder what your real thoughts would be.

Reply

Tony Dungy would rather obey the God of his faith and not fear what politicial groups think of him. If you don't agree with his viewpoint then don't bother to buy anything he endorses that you don't agree with.

Reply

"After all, five or six decades ago, many thought it was perfectly acceptable to say that interracial marriage was an abomination against God and should be made illegal. I'm pretty sure Dungy wouldn't support a group that promoted that idea. How much different is this, really?"

Yes, if interracial marriage and gay marriage are no different then the uproar against Dungy (or any against gay marriage) would be justified.

But they are different. The difference comes when one asks himself "What is marriage?" Is it just two people going into some special building, saying "I do," and then living together for the rest of their lives? Or is it something more?

I can't give the full, beautiful explanation, but I'll give as much as I can from the Christian (Dungy's) point-of-view:

Marriage is the union between a man and woman for spousal love and procreation. In other words, the fruit of the love between a man and a woman is a life, a child.

Marriage between a black man and white woman falls under this criterion. Between two men? No.

Anything else is "something else." Don't call it marriage, when it doesn't have the same beautiful purpose. Is this definition just arbitrary, or made up by someone for thought control? Or is it written in nature?

I fully understand if I can't convince everyone, but I just wanted to share it, whether or not you agree with it. Dungy doesn't hate homosexuals, he hates the actions.

Reply

Mr. Warner, if Colin Powell came into my home and influenced my children, I would be proud of it. If Bernie Marcus came into my home and tried to influence my children I would not have a problem with it. I f Sen. John Mcanin came into my home and tried to influence my children i would not have a problem with it, nor would I have a problem with them leaving with them eeither. Your point to assume that being influence by race or creed or religion is the same as being homosexual is not a good point to make. This is an issue of morality! not one of race. Please do not take me as a racist, because I am born of an interracial family and lived in S.F for five years. I understand the issues with the gay situation. However, I do not believe in gay marriage. They should have all the rights that maried people have if they wish...no problem. Personally, I don't want a gay person influencing my son, it is counter productive to my influencing him on the morality that i believe.

Reply

I COMPLETELY agree in protecting the sanctity of marriage...you know, garbage like "who wants to marry a millionaire" and teenagers running to Vegas and getting hitched...only to anull it a day later. American marriage is a complete JOKE--if it wasn't, the divorce rate wouldn't be so damn high (50 percent). I don't think it's humanly possible for the bible's definition of marriage to be disgraced more than it already has been, so why not just let gays in on this pathetic joke with us?

Reply

i think the point being made is clear. Some people think homosexuality is bad. I think they are ignorant to say so, but hey, these things take time. I see nothing wrong with Dungy standing for what he believes in, but he must suffer the consequences of his belief, if a gay group wishes to condemn/boycott Dungy and Colts so be it, it'll force real discussion on the topic and eventually lead us to a firm solution

Reply

SOME OF THESE COMMENTS REGARDING COACH DUNGY ARE ASSININE. HE STRONLY BELIEVES THAT MARRIAGE IS TO BE BETWEEN A MALE AND A FEMALE AND NOT OF INDIVIDUALS OF THE SAME SEX. I'M SURE COACH DUNGY AS WELL AS THE COLT'S ARE REALLY TREMBLING ABOUT REPERCUSSIONS!

Reply

Any deviation from the true purpose of marriage (divorce, contraception, gay marriage, abortion - yes, they are all deviations) leads to family problems (in the form of broken families, criminal activity of the children, etc.)

This really need not be grounded on any religious argument, but on the studies of the sociologists, psychologists, and other scientists we rely on to study what works with families. Browse through academic papers on scholar.google.com if you'd like to learn more.

If mutual love and procreation are not the driving motives for marriage, then the marriage will fail and selfishness will prevail.

I apologize to Mr. Warner or any of the readers if I have gone beyond the confines of a sports blog in my points, but I just wanted to contribute to the discussion.

Reply

Mr. Warner spectacularly misses the point and rehearses the same irrational pc mantra, namely, sexual behavior = race. Huh? And, because a person opposes homosexual behavior as wrong, he/she is therefore prejudiced (and a promoter of hate, as the spin goes!)? Please. It is a poor argument made, undercut by logic and example (an "outsports" link that needs to be judiciously viewed? Now THAT'S family friendly!) and by reference to "prejudice toward a group of people" - now there is a precise comment! Last I checked, pedophiles are a "group of people, radical religious circles are a "group of people", violent gangs are a "group of people", even folks who believe WWE wrestling is real are a "group of people"! People are people and matter to God, period. However, there are behaviors that are dangerous and destructive individually and societally, and it is not a matter of prejudice to stand and say such behaviors are wrong, or not good. To me, the better analogy is not homosexual to race, but homosexual behavior to, say, smoking. Those who choose to smoke (and then are compelled to smoke) matter to God and are free to pursue their behavior. However, smoking is dangerous to the one pursuing the behavior and destructive in its effect on society, so it should be identified and addressed as such. It seems the same is true for homosexual behavior... dangerous to the pursuer and destructive to the society (can you spell HIV/AIDS/STD's?). From Mr. Warner, I suppose we should just accept these things for pc's sake. Apparently, the wrong is not in the pursuit of destructive behaviors, but in saying that such behaviors are wrong.

Reply

It simply amazes me in today's world that if someone disagrees with someone else that person is openly prejudiced. Tony Dungy has a belief system that says that marriage between two people of the opposite sex is appropriate and this makes him prejudice. From his prespective marriage between two people of the same sex is wrong whether you like his position or not isn't important. Why not give the man credit for following his beliefs rather than ridiculing him for them. Most gays have the right to civil unions so why bring Christanity into it-maybe because we all know it is wrong yet want the church to bless it so we feel better about our wrong doing. Whether or not you agree with Tony and you have the right to agree or disagree you should balance your point of view by giving him credit for standing up for what he believes. I think one calls that "Courage".

Reply

I dont see how any one can compare interracial marriage to gays or gay marriage.
What kind of person would? What kind of morals does he or she have?
I dont need to explain the difference. People with good moral value already know.
As does Tony Dungy.
Way to go Tony!

Reply

The word discrimination has become a catchword for "any" moral standard. Am I a homophobe if my moral standard doesn't allow for homosexuality? Perhaps I am a hypophobe if I am against drug use. Since I have a moral obligation to keep my children safe, I discriminate against all sorts of evil, including homosexuality. That doesn't mean that I "fear" gays, that means that I don't approve of their perverse lifestyle, and that I have a moral obligation to voice my disapproval. I DISCRIMINATE THEREFORE I AM.

Reply

To #4 and #9, interpretations of the Bible were very much at the heart of resistance to inter-racial marriage.

Many of the state Supreme Court decisions that established or backed the definition of marraiage as between two people of the same race made direct reference to the obvious intentions of God.

In honor of the Colts, recall that the the Indiana Supreme Court defended its ruling by assuring us that it was not based on "prejudice, nor caste, nor injustice of any kind, but simply to suffer men to follow the law of races established by the Creator himself, and not to compel them to intermix contrary to their instincts."

The most famous of these legal/religious statements was part of the case that eventually undid these laws, in which a Virginia judge wrote that

"Almighty God created the races, white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

So, it's just worth remembering that it used to be pretty obvious to a lot of people that God was against inter-reacial marriage. Now a lot of people think those people were wrong, and that they were using the bible as a cover for bigotry and a fear of the new.

That doesn't mean that current religious objections to same-sex marraiges are wrong too, but ... it might explain why some (like the writer of this story) are suspicious, feeling like we've seen this before.

Reply

According to the Bible, yes, homosexuality is wrong.

But if you people who are throwing around scriptures and commands in the Bible and actually read what it says, you'd also notice that Jesus says his kingdom is no part of this world. It's not your place to tell governments to make decisions based on your religious beliefs - and Jesus told you not to, either, because his kingdom is not a part of this world.

Because of my religious beliefs, I'm against homosexuality as well. The Bible clearly condemns it and labels it a sin. However, it is not my place to tell other people how to live their life. I can share the Bible with them and encourage them to live their lives ina ccord with it, but it's not my place, nor is it my right, to tell them how to live or to try to get laws passed to force them to live according to my beliefs.

People who try to get laws passed based on their religious beliefs are some of the biggest intolerant scum on the planet. What if Muslims in America tried to get a law passed that women had to wear head coverings everywhere they go? That'd be idiotic, wouldn't it? It's not their right to ask that. Neither is it your right to try to get the laws changed to suit your religious beliefs. If you don't want your kids exposed to homosexuality, put them in a private school or home school them. I assume you also do not have a TV in the house, since the damage from a TV is infinitely worse than simply knowing a homosexual person.

You people take the Bible and pervert it.

Reply

Jebuz H Christmas... can we please not inject politics in to sports? Why was it necessary to write a post declaring him "openly prejudiced". Just because he doesn't share your views. How is this relevant to the NFL? Why waste space on a sports site with your political commentary? Stick to the free agency rumors. You're better at it.

Reply

RE#16

The Bible also outlaws murder. Are you saying that it is wrong for religious people to wan murder to be illegal because their religion tells them it is wrong?

Regarding your comments about Muslims. It IS their right to ask that. They would be refused, but they have a perfect right to try to get whatever law they want passed.

Reply

We have to remember that Mr Warner is being "politically correct". And you need to remember that I have a definition for "politically correct". It means "I WILL LIE. BECAUSE IF I TELL THE TRUTH SOMEONE MAY GET OFFENDED OR NOT VOTE THE WAY I WANT" even though the action we are discussing is WRONG!!!!!
As a Christian, I love gay people. I do not agree with their lifestyle.

Reply

Anyone who believes in the Bible as justification for anything, is simply a believer in Fairy Tales and bed-time stories. The Bible is fiction, best selling fiction, but fiction none the less. If you morons can't see the parallels between our societies views on race relations and homosexuality, you're too dense to be educated. If Dungy wants to take a stand, that's his right, just like it's another person's right to criticize him. I'm going to guess there's a good chance 20 years ago Dungy would not have been allowed to be the speaker at this thing. But that's just my view, because I don't let a fictional character control my life.

Reply