Daddy D launches petition drive in support of Dungy

Just drop the "y" from Dungy, that's Daddy D's Real Quest

---

by: RogernDC @ Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 16:52:46 PM CDT

DAMN!

You beat me to it.

=>The truth usually isn't pretty. Don't blame me for telling it.<=

---

by: Chadster @ Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 20:15:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dear Coach Dungy

I've decided I can no longer support the Indianapolis Colts.  Sure, y'all are a good team, and my cousin plays for you, but I've got a real problem with black head coaches.

See, traditionally, head coaching jobs went to white men.  Think Lombardi, Landry, Noll, Shula, Madden... all the greats are white men.  Having a black man as a head coach goes against decades of tradition and good old fashioned NFL values.  Black head coaches create a distraction in the locker room and lead to a breakdown of team morale.

I'm not anti-anything else. I'm not trying to downgrade anyone else. But I'm trying to promote good football -- good football the traditional way.

(See, Tony... discrimination and prejudice have no place in the NFL.  By the way, I didn't really mean that I have a problem with black head coaches.  Just prejudiced asshole head coaches cloaking their bigotry with the mantle of piety.)

"If people let government decide which foods they eat and medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: RadicalRuss @ Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 17:12:27 PM CDT

Nice, but we've tried that before

I have no doubt Dungy would respond with the "your 'lifestyle choice' is not equivalent to my race" line, but your point is important even if the anti-gay right won't hear it. After all, many of them, apparently Dungy himself, have chosen to join an evangelical "lifestyle" that, at the beginning of the Republic, was considered so anti-social, so detrimental to the very foundations of society (namely, the established Protestant religions), that its preachers were arrested.

I always wonder why the right wants to use the "lifestyle choice" argument when they belong to a relative fringe lifestyle (i.e., the more they believe in "biblical inerrancy" the fewer people who agree with them) that could easily be the subject of similar laws if their interpretation of the First Amendment were actually ever adopted.

---

by: CPT_Doom @ Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 18:43:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Lifestyle vs Race

"your 'lifestyle choice' is not equivalent to my race"

I grew up in a semi-bigoted household.  "Colored" "N-word" "Jiggabo" were common.  I say semi instead of fully because once my family took time to know the person and not the color the person was somehow not one of "them".  I don't know what it is like to be black.  I've worked very hard to overcome my upbringing.

Having said all that, I do wonder one thing.

I agree that it is a difficult comparison between race and sexual orientation.  However, at least with race it is pretty obvious who your friends and enemies might be.  Contrast that with something that can be "hidden".

I know that in my household it was extremely rare that any of those words would have been used directly to the face of someone black (or african american - I've asked to be sure I was not offending and - at least in my corner of the world - black is winning about 4-1).

I have been in situations where people went on and on about gays, faggots, etc. not knowing there was one in their midsts.  Sometimes I call them on it, but most of the time, I'm ashamed to say, I take the safe way out and suffer in silence.

It is also difficult to tell who your allies may be.  I'm just not sure if I am downplaying what it might like to be black in America and pitying myself for being Gay in Indiana.

Thoughts?  Don't be afraid to rip me on this.  I sincerely want to add this to my reprogramming :)

---

by: whtz @ Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 21:08:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And then, gay virgins

When I get the "lifestyle choice ain't race" argument, I then as the proponent if he believes in gay virgins.  That is, can someone be gay before they've actually done something sexually gay?

Because the heart of their argument is that there is no such thing as gay.  There are only confused sinning heterosexuals.  Their answer must be "no, there are no gay virgins".

Then I launch into character as the lisping-est, limp-wristed-est, fabulous-est gay stereotype I can muster.  "So, as long as I haven't actually sucked a dick, you won't mind me in your locker room eyeing all the fabulous beefcake, right?  After all, I'm not gay."

That takes them to "aberrant behavior" land... and then I've got 'em.  "So, gay to you isn't just about having gay sex -- I mean, Rock Hudson had gay sex, but appeared to be the most virile straight in the world.  Y'all liked Rock Hudson movies, right?  And my hypothetical limp-wristed virgin, he'd be gay as all get-out to you, huh?  Someone can be gay, then, whether one is a virgin or not, correct?"

Once they've reached gay virgin territory, I can twist 'em into all sorts of rhetorical knots.  We can go rounds on "what about a virgin who acts totally straight but has topless Abercrombie male models posted in his private locker?"  Well, deep inside, he feels these feelings, they might respond, but if he keeps them private (don't ask, don't tell), we could live with that.  "Ah, but if someone in the locker room sees his Abercrombie posters, wouldn't that make the other men feel uncomfortable?  Wouldn't you then have to kick him out for being gay?"

Eventually I can get them to admitting they wish to treat people different based on what they feel (desire, lust, whatever you wanna call it) if those feelings are made public.  From there it's a short jaunt to "What if you could be fired, denied housing, or refused marriage because you 'feel' a close personal relationship to Jesus Christ?  What if it was fairly common in America for gangs of youths to harrass, intimidate, beat, and kill Christians?  What if I said to you, 'I don't care how you worship in the privacy of your church, just don't try to force your lifestyle down my throat?'  What if the defense for beating Christians was 'they shouldn't go around openly flaunting their piety'?  Sure, you could hide your cross necklace and Bible, try to act all secular and vulgar to 'fit in', and hope to be unnoticed by the anti-Christian bigots, but why should you?"

"Why shouldn't you be free to be open about your lifestyle choice?  Why shouldn't you be treated equally under the law, regardless of your lifestyle choice?"

The gay issue is fun for me to argue, because no matter what you think it is -- lifestyle choice or immutable characteristic -- I can always win the argument.  If it's lifestyle choice, then it's protected under the First Amerndment (freedom of expression) and arguable with religion analogies.  If it's an immutable characteristic, then it's protected under the Fourteenth Amendment and arguable with race analogies.

The only downside is that you can't win an argument with fundies, because they have the "God says so" trump card.

"If people let government decide which foods they eat and medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson

---

by: RadicalRuss @ Wed Mar 28, 2007 at 11:36:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Re: Tony Dungy

Dear Mr. Dungy,

You have a right to your opinion and I honor that right. However, I should remind you that finally winning a Superbowl (that you couldn't lead your team to when you had the best record in the AFC) does not give you any type of special knowledge of just what is "God's side" in the complex issues of our world. Please be advised that the Bible that I assume you follow does not say "And God created Heaven and Earth and gave Tony Dungy special status to be on his side and to know his mysteries."

If I am wrong and you have the correct clarification of this, please let me know.

Until then, I would like to make a small suggestion that you do not mistake your awards and status as any type of designation to tell the rest of us just what is God's side in the complex matters of this world, including the issue of same-sex marriage.

---

by: Alvin McEwen @ Tue Mar 27, 2007 at 20:21:22 PM CDT