Today on my way home, I was listening to CBS Sports Radio’s the Doug Gottlieb Show. A couple of years ago I was a regular listener and kind of got out of the habit after he left ESPN and went to CBS Sports. But we have a CBS affiliate here now so for the last couple of days I have been tuning in. Mr. Gottlieb is pretty entertaining for the commute home. He’s can be funny and usually has a fresh take on sports stories that I enjoy. Better yet, his producer is a Georgia fan, as I am, and they were discussing the SEC, which caught my attention when I was scanning channels.
Today, was different. Today the show, and particularly the Producer (whose name I don’t know. I mean no disrespect to him by not using his name) took my breath away.
The topic was Tony Dungy. If you don’t know, Tony was recently quoted as saying he would not have drafted the league’s first openly gay player. The next day Coach Dungy clarified that he meant he would not have drafted him because he would not have wanted the media circus that would have ensued. He stated that he did not believe that this player should be denied an opportunity to play in the NFL simply because he was gay.
Gottlieb and his producer were debating whether or not they believed Coach Dungy’s explanation. The producer didn’t feel comfortable with the explanation because he knew that the Coach is a devout Christian and was in his words “opposed to homosexuals” (Gottlieb may have said this; I was driving at the time and am not certain). So the producer felt that Dungy’s Christian views must certainly have been a part of his statement about the player.
That’s when it happened. The producer stated that it was hard to evaluate a Christian’s views because “religious zealots cannot be reasoned with.”
Let that one sink in a moment. This is a statement, uttered on a national radio program, that is stunning in scope!
In his view, any person that holds the traditional Christian view of marriage that has stood for 2000 plus years are unreasonable zealots. Think of all the people that includes. Sir Issac Newton, Blaise Pascal, Martin Luther, John Calvin, or in modern times, Ravi Zacharias, Dr. Albert Mohler, the Pope, and Billy Graham, and of course little ol’ me and I would estimate around 150 million of my fellow Americans.
The other part that is so hard to get my mind around is that he paints with this gigantic brush simply because these millions hold a view different than his. (Tolerance anyone?).
I’ll try to get a screen shot up of my tweets later. (Not really sure how to do that.)But my first tweet said: “So your Producers stance is that all Christians are religious zealots who cannot be reasoned with. Nice to know.”
A few minutes later Mr. Gottlieb read my name and tweet on the air. I am fine with that. I expressed my opinion in public so no problem there. The producer then said that he didn’t mean all Christians only the one’s who don’t accept homosexual marriage. This would of course include all Bible believing Christians including the Pope, Billy Graham and Ravi Zacharias among others. All brilliant, loving, kind men. None of these men strike me as having an issue with their powers of reason.
It went from there. I am not going to retype all the tweets I sent here. They read most of them on the air. I am also not going to get into the depths of the entire gay marriage discussion in this post. I have done that in the past on this blog. If you want an excellent presentation of the Christian view on this issue I suggest Dr. Albert Mohler’s excellent response to Matthew Vines book. Dr. Mohler’s book is entitled “God and the Gay Christian?” The question mark is the only difference between that title and the title of Vine’s book.
But this discussion was not really about homosexual marriage. It was really about Hutzpah. At one point I referenced 6000 years of human history and the multiple cultures that have accepted traditional marriage. They blew that off as old fashioned. Sure some ideas are old fashioned and need to be done away with. But when an idea is held dear by billions of people through history, and a huge cross section of cultures, shouldn’t one give at least a little pause before tossing that tradition out like yesterday’s garbage?
My larger point was that Coach Dungy and I base our views on the Bible and human history. What does the producer base his views on…his opinion and the current mood of a single culture in a short span of time? That should give him pause. And if it doesn’t, is he not guilty of arrogance on a high level? I’m not saying they have to agree with my view or Coach Dungy’s view. That was never my goal in tweeting to them. But the mindset they stated is scary. The willingness to dismiss Tony Dungy and all that he has stood for over his career and all the good he has done as an unreasonable zealot smacks of fascism. What ever happened with agreeing to disagree?
This recent movement of trying to end careers and destroy people who don’t hold to the current view of the culture has to stop. I should emphasize here that neither Doug Gottlieb or his producer ever advocated punishment or dismissal for Dungy. But others in the culture have and do. In its current state, the least tolerant most oppressive group in the country is the militant gay lobby. People are losing jobs and businesses simply because they believe in traditional marriage. One is no longer allowed to be pro-traditional marriage, you can only be “anti-homosexual.”
I find that mindset the part that is positively scary, and I will continue to take stands to defend against it.
Finally, the guys on the show were pretty fair to me. They made fun of some typos but I had to keep pulling over to tweet and then type rapid fire to keep up with radio comments. I don’t mind that ribbing, even though I think that at first they were going to try to paint me as the stereotypical ignorant right winger. However, their characterization of the Christian view towards both marriage and homosexuals was way off and very stereotypical.
I’m sure I’ll tune in again. I just hope next time they focus on SEC (and particularly Georgia) football.