08/15/2007
Bush Appoints Anti-Gay Colts Coach Tony Dungy to Council
Indianapolis Colts coach and Super Bowl winner Tony Dungy has been asked to serve on President Bush's Council on Service and Civic Participation, according to reports:
"The 25-member council represents leaders from government, business, entertainment, athletics and non-profit organizations committed to growing the spirit of service and civic participation."
Dungy: "I had heard it was in the mix for a while, and it’s just an honor. It’s something we always talk about here with our team, about serving your community and being part of the community and trying to make things better. To be appointed by the President is obviously a once-in-a-lifetime type thrill. We talked a little bit about it and they called and asked if I’d be willing to serve. Of course, you would. I didn’t know how it all had to transpire. Apparently, they had to do some (background) checking and that kind of thing."
Apparently passed muster for all the work he did last March raising money for anti-gay hate groups in Indiana.
Posted 2:30 PM EST by Andy Towle in George W. Bush, News, Tony Dungy | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Even apart from the man's homophobia, placing a football figure on this council makes no sense. Isn't the cult of football, and the hundreds of millions of hours that people spend each year on it (watching it, following it, talking about it, shopping for it, driving the kids to practice, etc.) one of the reasons they have no time for civic participation? What could Coach Dungheap or any figure really do that would be as effective as saying, "You know, you should pay less attention to us and more attention to your own communities." But, you know, that's not gonna happen, is it?
Posted by: Gianpiero | Aug 16, 2007 3:50:51 PM
It's clear that Stephen is not fully disclosing and has a hidden agenda. He betrays his hidden intentions. He often refers to gay people as the more clinical word "homosexuals"...religious rightists always refer to gay people as homosexuals (just watch them on TV). They won't give an inch on that. Gay people rarely do (how many of your friends refer to themselves as "homosexual"). I mean, come on...
Hi Stephen. Being disingenuous seems worse than being outwardly anti-gay. How about you stop hiding behind your smoke so we can see the fire?
Posted by: Mark | Aug 16, 2007 4:21:32 PM
Mark,
I'll grant you that "gay" is much smoother going down - so to speak - than using the word homosexual. But that's exactly why the change was made, so that others, when referring to homosexuals and lesbians didn't have to use such an "offensive" word. Are the majority of gays embarrassed about this?
I don't have any hidden agenda. I simply believe that marriage is between a male and a female. I support all the rights that homosexuals and lesbians seek in the campaign, but there is a sexual difference, hence, there is rationale for calling it a civil union (It's exactly what approx. 90% of the presidential candidates also believe).
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 17, 2007 7:24:20 AM
Stephen,
I am a homosexual -- no shame here. I don't find the word offensive in the least. It does sound rather clinical to most people so I use gay or queer.
BTW, I apologize for telling you to "fuck off" earlier. Tempers do flare.
Posted by: John | Aug 17, 2007 11:03:14 AM
John,
Hey, apology accepted.
I cannot fathom why so many gay & lesbians are so hard-lined with this "all or nothing" militant attitude. Unfortunately, it's that exact type that gives the community a bad name and has heterosexuals looking at the homosexual and lesbian community with a jaundiced eye.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 17, 2007 12:12:52 PM
Once again I call bullshit on you Stephen. You DO have a hidden agenda and you're unwillingness to admit to why you use the word "homosexual" as a noun, outside of a clinical context, is just another giveaway of where you're coming from.
You actively hid the fact that you were not gay for a long time. You actively hid that you believe that TRUE Christians believe that homosexuality is ungodly and an abomination, until recently. You hid the fact that you post under multiple screen names, all agreeing with or defending your point of view and all attacking those who challenge you. And you continue to act as if your only issue with "homosexuals" is the marriage issue.
Don't lecture me or anyone else here about OUR community or how we should feel or how we should act. Don't presume to be an authority on what we call ourselves or chastise us for not wanting to be labeled in clinical terms. Stick with your own damned community and fix it's problems and leave us to take care of our own. TRUST ME you will have your hands full fixing all the things (INCLUDING MARRIAGE) that straight people have fucked up.
You lecture us about the appropriateness of the term "homosexual" and then say "homosexuals and lesbians". NEWSFLASH Einstein: Lesbians ARE homosexuals! The fact that you call gay men homosexuals and lesbians lesbians gives even more insight into your ignorance. Just like your buds Tony Perkins, James Dobson and Lou Sheldon, and most other "compassionate" homophobes you are almost entirely concerned with, and focused on, and bothered by, gay MALES.
Your obsession with all things gay, um "homosexual" is truly disturbing.
Sorry John, I think you had it right the first time.
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 17, 2007 12:46:23 PM
My "agenda" consists of speaking out for that which I believe to be true, as do most of the presidential candidates (and illions of Americans): That marriage is between a man and a woman.
Perhaps Zeke ought to save his keystrokes for typing letters to the candidates. See if he can change their mind.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 17, 2007 1:16:07 PM
Make that millions of Americans.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 17, 2007 1:17:22 PM
As a matter of fact I do exactly that and when I do I write them under ONE name rather than trying to make my opinion sound more popular by writing them under numerous different names.
That's because I'm honest and straight forward with my identity, my agenda and the foundation of my beliefs. I don't hide in the fog of misinformation or use smoke and mirrors of multiple identities with multiple personalities to mislead people here.
How about you Stephen? Can you say the same?
Are you ready to be embarrassed?
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 17, 2007 2:11:34 PM
Would that be like the millions of people who believed that slavery was just fine and approved by God (and backed up their belief with their Christian faith and Bible verses and what THEY called “common sense”)?
Would that be like the "millions of people" who believed that it was just peachy that women were relegated legally to second class citizen status with no property or voting rights (and backed up their belief with their Christian faith and Bible verses and what THEY called “common sense”)?
Would that be like the "millions of people" who believed that it should be against the law for people of different races to marry (and backed up their belief with their Christian faith and Bible verses and what THEY called “common sense”)?
Would that be like the "millions of people" who believed that African-Americans should be segregated, given separate but equal access to goods and services (that were ALWAYS separate but NEVER equal), not allowed to vote, and were intended to be subservient because of a misinterpretation of the Bible (and backed up their belief with their Christian faith and Bible verses and what THEY called “common sense”)?
Would that be like the "millions of people" who believe that gay people choose their sexual orientation; believe that "homosexual" people have A "lifestyle; believe that the opposite of good is gay, the opposite of Christian is gay, the opposite of "family values" is gay; all while believing that gay = unmanly, gay = pedophile, gay = drug abuser, gay = pervert, gay = anti-family/anti-God/anti-Christian/anti-values/anti-moral?
“Millions of people” have believed each and every one of the things listed above Stephen. In fact, the MAJORITY of people used to believe in each and every one of the things listed above. Would you deny that this is true?
Is the "millions of people believe blah blah blah” the best argument you've got there Stephen?
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 17, 2007 2:12:34 PM
STEPHEN: I have one question for you: are you a man who has sex with other men?
Posted by: peterparker | Aug 17, 2007 2:38:51 PM
I could rebutt many of your points,Zeke. But just one right now: I have not posted on Towleroad under any other name, surname, alias, etc.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 17, 2007 2:43:03 PM
You "could" but will you?
I don't think you can without giving yourself away even more.
Please don't "rebutt" my points. That sounds kinky.
However, I CHALLENGE you to rebut them, one and all.
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 17, 2007 2:54:10 PM
Hey STEPHEN...still waiting for a response to my question!
Posted by: peterparker | Aug 17, 2007 3:37:19 PM
So, it's become pretty apparent at this point that STEPHEN won't answer my question about whether or not 'he' is a man who has sex with other men. Therefore, it seems pretty clear that STEPHEN is not gay and has come here with an agenda.
Posted by: peterparker | Aug 17, 2007 5:16:22 PM
I guess STEPHEN doesn't want to answer your question PETERPARKER. :(
He's still waiting to get the answers to my questions faxed to him from Focus on the Anus headquarters where they have a full time staff of spin meisters on call to assist when heretics like me ask such problematic questions as the straight forward ones I asked above.
That's OK STEPHEN, I can wait.
In the meantime, just for kicks, let's review the Focus on the Anus Playbook for how to handle problematic questions:
1) If you can't answer, stall. 2) If you can't stall, confuse. 3) If you can't confuse, elude. 4) If you can't elude, deny. 5) If you can't deny, lie. 6) If you can't lie, attack!
If that's too complicated you can use the one step shortcut version. Most conservatives and fundamentalists do:
If you can't answer...attack!
Rinse and repeat!
These tactics can also be found in the GOP playbook.
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 18, 2007 12:39:50 AM