A question about Dungy

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Thats such a cop out underdogg, so because he had a good Defense he doesnt deserve the credit?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from underdogg. Show underdogg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Tas - maybe I am just not being clear.  If so, my apologies.  I do not intend to take ALL credit from Brady.  For those SB's he is at least as good as Rothlesberger has been.  And he has clearly gotten better.  He may be better than manning.  I don't know.  His record certainly indicates it. 

    But back to the point.  The only thing I was say was that Brady got so much of the accolades and I think that the D deserved more.  I'll say where manning is involved in his SB winning year.  The d stepped up and its why the colts won. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from provpats. Show provpats's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    [QUOTE]Tas - maybe I am just not being clear.  If so, my apologies.  I do not intend to take ALL credit from Brady.  For those SB's he is at least as good as Rothlesberger has been.  And he has clearly gotten better.  He may be better than manning.  I don't know.  His record certainly indicates it.  But back to the point.  The only thing I was say was that Brady got so much of the accolades and I think that the D deserved more.  I'll say where manning is involved in his SB winning year.  The d stepped up and its why the colts won. 
    Posted by underdogg[/QUOTE]

    and that is where Polian faile.  By failing to support Manning on both sides of the ball he wasted Manning's prime years.  A guy with that much experience should know that it took a full team to be successful.  yet he stacked the O, neglected the D (although he did bring in that defensive mastermind dungy, who he must have expected to perform miracles).  When his plan blew apart consistently early in the century he looked fo rthe comp committee to bail him out of his own situation.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from provpats. Show provpats's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    [QUOTE]and that is where Polian failed.  By failing to support Manning on both sides of the ball he wasted Manning's prime years.  A guy with that much experience should know that it took a full team to be successful.  yet he stacked the O, neglected the D (although he did bring in that defensive mastermind dungy, who he must have expected to perform miracles).  When his plan blew apart consistently early in the century he looked for the comp committee to bail him out of his own situation.
    Posted by provpats[/QUOTE]
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    I have never thought of it that way but he is right Bill Polian and Tony Dungy wasted Peyton Mannings prime years because they did not put together a full team. Stacking the offense didnt work and now Peyton is what 32? 33? and has one super bowl? You can not even deny that if Manning was a Patriot he would have at least 3 if not more titles. If he was a Pat i think Manning would have something like 5 championships under his belt because the Pats would have given him a D and a complete team. But then again we never had great WRs like the Colts until two years ago so maybe Peyton could not have done what he did with out harrison and wayne. I guess we will never know.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Taz, that is treason, to say that Manning would have gotten more super bowls with the same team Brady had.  More than being treason, it's silly.  Captain Chokesalot would have improved his 70.9 playoff passer rating throwing to the likes of Deion Branch and David Givens? 

    Dogg - thank you for stating that not only is Brady awesome, but the Pats defense this decade is awesome.  What you are saying is we are the best team.  Thank you very much. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    LoL I was more or less trying tio take a shot at Polian and Dungy lol But yes you are right i should be stoned for what I posted.....and not the good kind of stoned that invloved weed I am talking you throwing rocks at my head in town squear lol
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Killa
    Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you.  I did want to respond though.

    [QUOTE]See this all comes down to what you beleave, if you beleave in the bible then of course thats the way you are going to look at things but if you dont then of course you will see things differently. Now I am about to talk about the subjects which we have all touched on and opened the door to (because i sure as hell didnt bring up religion)[QUOTE] 

    I only brought it up because people were beating the bushes all around it and I wanted to make a case

    [/QUOTE] and if some of you get offened i am sorry for that but thus is the nature of teh beast when talking about things like this. [QUOTE] 

    No offense taken, I love the debate as I said

    [/QUOTE]If you want to follow a outdated book [QUOTE] 

    Is War and Peace outdated?  The Illiad?  Sun Tsu's "The Art of War"?  Aesop's Fables?  No.  There are writings that are timeless and always relevant  The Bible is full of wisdom that is always applicable.

    [/QUOTE]that was writen thousends of years ago by man not god then that is up to you [QUOTE] 

    I would argue that it was God inspiring the writing through man.

    [/QUOTE]but i beg you to try and convince a gay person that its not hate. [QUOTE] 

    See, there is a problem.  Truth is truth whether or not people are convinced or not.  This is where relativism creeps in and we can make ourselves "God" with what we perceive as the truth.  The Bible can speak for itself and it can prove itself.  Two thirds of it was prophetic when written, and it all came to pass (minus the things still yet to come).  The truth is that I love gays in spite of their lifestyle.  It doesn't matter to me if they believe me or not.

    [/QUOTE]Tony Dungy is a black man he should understand more then anyone what it means to have the same rights as everyone else but instead he chooses to follow blindly and go with the "word of god" and rob these people of their rights. [QUOTE]

    Sexuality is a learned behavior.  I know that is debatable.  But ask a psychologist.  To place one's sexual preference/choice on the same level of skin color and the struggle that minorities have fought for, takes away from that struggle.

     [/QUOTE]I would rather think for myself then be told what to think by a book writen by a bunch of power hungry white men.[QUOTE] 

    How do you know they were power hungry?  Have you studied their lives?  They didn't rule over anyone, they preached.  No one can tell you what to think.  A premise is suggested, arguments are put forth, and you make a decision based on what is reasonable.  Seems to me that you may have been reading the Bible with your conclusions already firmly planted in your mind.

    [/QUOTE] I do beleave in god, [QUOTE] 

    The Bible says that demons believe too.  It doesn't matter that you believe if you do nothing with that belief.  Faith has to be acted upon.  If I believe I'll get killed if I walk onto the highway, but still walk onto it, I really didn't have a belief that changed me.

    [/QUOTE]I do think there is something bigger then us out there however I do not beleave in orginized religion. [QUOTE] 

    Yes, it has it's problems, but the Bible says that Jesus loved the Church enough to die for it, so I choose to do the same, in spite of the problems.

    [/QUOTE]I dont think Dungys hate for gays has anything to do with my original post what so ever but someone opened this can of worms so i had to add my two cents. [QUOTE] 

    Glad you did.

    [/QUOTE]Im sorry if i offend you but this is just the way one person thinks. [QUOTE] 

    No offense taken.

    [/QUOTE]I do not see Dungy "logic" because i think he is stupid for his faith (again I am sorry if this offends you) so we will never see eye to eye on his reasoning because I just dont see it the same way you do. [QUOTE] 

    Faith and logic often bang heads, but i think it comes from misunderstandings.  I'm not offended by your viewpoint.  It would be disingenuous for me to say that I respect it though.  I don't respect a viewpoint that I don't agree with, just like you don't respect mine (or Dungy's).  However, I fully respect your right to have that viewpoint (and I do belive that right will soon be eroded).  I spent 24 years in military servcice doing my part so you and I can have these viewpoints and have this discussion.  Bur don't mistake my lack of respect of your viewpoint as disrespect for you or your worth as a person.

    [/QUOTE]You ask why we Americans think its ok to dump 12000 years of being anti gay maybe its because that book was writen 12000 years ago. Are we as humans the same people we were 12000 years ago or have we progressed over the years? [QUOTE] 

    If you can show me, apart from technology, how we have progressed, I'll listen.  We still have murders, rapes, thefts, lying, hatred...and the list goes on.  Technology doesn't make us better.  It often makes better at being evil.  There is nothing progressive about sin.

    [/QUOTE]Like I said if you think that it is the true word of god then of course you will still listen to a 12000 year old book but for those of us who do not buy into it it seems stupid to blindly follow a book writen 12000 years ago. Either way the reason this whoel gay subject came up was because someone said he hated gay people and someone said where is your proff that he hates gays and then I said we dont need any proof, he has opened his faith up to the public and all we need to know is that he is a church going man to know how he fels about gay people. Now you can throw your arms up in teh air all you want and get mad but the simple fact is even though you think its ok to say "well i dont hate gays i just dont think they deserve the same rights as everyone else" to us people outside of the church all that is saying is i dont think gay people deserve the same rights as everyone else which to me is hate. [QUOTE] 

    Ok then, where does it end?  What if I want to marry my dog?  Or a little boy?  Or my sister?  You may think that is absurd (and I agree), but it wasn't too long ago that people thought the same thing about gays marrying.  You know it will never stop.  NAMBLA is working hard to legalize their agenda.  Why would you discriminate against them or your neighbor that wants to marry his cow?  Carry the argument to its "logical" conclusion.  Sin is never satisfied.

    [/QUOTE]Dress it up all you want but if you think that way you are a bigit. Gay or not everyone has a right to be happy [QUOTE] 

    Happy?  Happy?  Since when do I have a right to be happy?  I have a Constitutional right to pursue happiness, but happy is up to me.  How is the government going to ensure I'm happy?  What if I refuse to be happy?  Is the Government liable?  Happiness comes from inside and not from a piece of paper that says your man and wife or man and man or wife and wife.  I have no right to be happy.  There are plenty of unhappy people due to numerous reasons.  This is a non-argument.

    [/QUOTE]and for someone to deny a person that right because the book they happen to follow as faith tells them it was not ok for gays to be married 12000 years agov its just the same as a member of the KKK saying blacks cant do this or that because they are not teh same or as strong as the white man. [QUOTE] 

    Sorry, can't agree.  It's not the same thing.  I can't track with you on this one.

    [/QUOTE]Its the same thing and even if you dont hate gay people it is re tarded of you to pretend that there are not millions of church going people out there who do in fact hate gay people. [QUOTE] 

    I'm sure there are people that do hate gays, just as there are people who hate people of different skin color.  I'm not denying this.  But the way to get over it is not by avoiding Church.

    [/QUOTE]And as far as you know Tony Dungy is one of those people. [QUOTE] 

    Unless you know this for sure and have evidence, then it is just your opinion.

    [/QUOTE]He spare headed a campain to make sure gays did not get teh same rights as everyone else so why is wrong for one to assume he hates gays? [QUOTE] 

    Trying to pass a law that protects marriage is not the same as hating gays.  Why don't you accuse gays of hating traditional believers in marriage?  It's the same argument in reverse.  Why am I the hater and not the gay activist?  Completely hypocritical don't you think?

    [/QUOTE]And Underdogg i have no idea why you would list teh fact that Tony Dungy worked with George W. Bush as a good thing, if anything its a mark against him that he would let his name even be in the same sentence as that greedy no good POS George W Bush. [QUOTE] 

    Ahhh, for another time.

    [/QUOTE]But once again all this gay stuff is way off point what we are talking about is whether it is ok for Dungy to only try and help men of teh same color as himself. If Bob Kraft went out of his way to help only white people would he or would he not be called a racist? So again do you think he would put his neck on the line for a white player teh way he did with Vick? cause i dont and if you do think he would what makes you think so?
    Posted by MVPkilla[/QUOTE]

    I'd say if Dungy or Kraft said that they would ONLY help peopl of their own color, they might be able to be considered racist.  As far as I know, Dungy has not said this or done this.

    Thanksfor the thread, and God bless.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

         -- "Seems to me that you may have been reading the Bible with your conclusions already firmly planted in your mind." --


    Isn't this what preacher's do?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yapple. Show Yapple's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Dungy isn't stupid. He knows that being a celebrity provides him with a convenient soapbox. And no media entity would dare withhold fawning coverage of a religious person in this country. Being successful might also be a prerequisite. No one pays attention to Jon Kitna.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    [QUOTE]     -- "Seems to me that you may have been reading the Bible with your conclusions already firmly planted in your mind." -- Isn't this what preacher's do?
    Posted by prairiemike[/QUOTE]

    PM

    I was refering to Killa's note that he had read the Bible.  Preachers read the Bible, make a decision to follow it, then become preachers.  It seems to me, and I may be wrong, that Killa had his conclusions about the Bible in place before he read it.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yapple. Show Yapple's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "Is War and Peace outdated?  The Illiad?  Sun Tsu's "The Art of War"?  Aesop's Fables?  No.  There are writings that are timeless and always relevant  The Bible is full of wisdom that is always applicable."

    If someone starts shooting people at an abortion clinic, it isn't likely that you will hear him yelling..."Tolstoy told me to do this!"
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    [QUOTE]" Is War and Peace outdated?  The Illiad?  Sun Tsu's "The Art of War"?  Aesop's Fables?  No.  There are writings that are timeless and always relevant  The Bible is full of wisdom that is always applicable." If someone starts shooting people at an abortion clinic, it isn't likely that you will hear him yelling..."Tolstoy told me to do this!"
    Posted by Yapple[/QUOTE]

    Probably true, but even if he said "The Bible told me to do it", that wouldn't make it true.  You can blame things that psychos do on the Bible if you want to, but it sounds like an excuse to not do what it really says.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    347 thanks for the reply, i am really enjoying this debate. It will take me a while to respond to your response haha becaseu i am at work so its takes a while to type out a long response but i will get to it so check back.

    Yapple that is a very good point that I was also going to make. You can not compear the bible to those other books he listed because millions of people dont follow those books as their guiding light in a world of darkness the way people do with the bible. People wont kill to protect the words writen in Sun Zu's Art of War or the illiad or anyof those books but they will kill for what is writen in the bible. so it is not the same thing what so ever.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    [QUOTE]347 thanks for the reply, i am really enjoying this debate. It will take me a while to respond to your response haha becaseu i am at work so its takes a while to type out a long response but i will get to it so check back. Yapple that is a very good point that I was also going to make. You can not compear the bible to those other books he listed because millions of people dont follow those books as their guiding light in a world of darkness the way people do with the bible. People wont kill to protect the words writen in Sun Zu's Art of War or the illiad or anyof those books but they will kill for what is writen in the bible. so it is not the same thing what so ever.
    Posted by MVPkilla[/QUOTE]

    Copy all Killa.  I'll be waiting.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

         -- "People wont kill to protect the words writen in Sun Zu's Art of War or the illiad or anyof those books but they will kill for what is writen in the bible. so it is not the same thing what so ever." --

    I'll kill the first person who says anything disparaging about "Lords of the Plain."

    Don't tempt me.Yell
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    this all comes down to what you beleave, if you beleave in the bible then of course thats the way you are going to look at things but if you dont then of course you will see things differently. Now I am about to talk about the subjects which we have all touched on and opened the door to (because i sure as hell didnt bring up religion)Replying to:

    I only brought it up because people were beating the bushes all around it and I wanted to make a case
    and if some of you get offened i am sorry for that but thus is the nature of teh beast when talking about things like this. Replying to:

    No offense taken, I love the debate as I said
    If you want to follow a outdated book Replying to:

    Is War and Peace outdated?  The Illiad?  Sun Tsu's "The Art of War"?  Aesop's Fables?  No.  There are writings that are timeless and always relevant  The Bible is full of wisdom that is always applicable.
    (You are right when you say the bible is full of wisdom, it has many storys that apply to everyday life and I get that but you can not compeer the bible to the books you have listen above, its just not the same. People don’t devote their lives to following Aesop’s Fables and people don’t kill in the name of Sun Tsu’s  Art of war. Millions of people all over the world follow the bible and that sets it aside. 12000 years ago people thought differently and did not understand things the way we do now and that to me makes it outdated. Now is it a worth while read? Yes it is but should I devote my life to its teachings? I don’t think so.) that was writen thousends of years ago by man not god then that is up to you Replying to:

    I would argue that it was God inspiring the writing through man.
    (Like I said before you are a believer so of course that’ s how you would see it, but men wrote it and then the Church rewrote it. Hell spend one afternoon watching the History Channel and you can see all the corrupt stuff that has gone down through the church. Stuff that was left out of the bible, entire passages were excluded from it because they didn’t fall in line with how the church wanted its people to think.  Men are human and humans are greedy and corrupt so even you have to admit that somewhere along the way human nature had to pop his head into the picture.)but i beg you to try and convince a gay person that its not hate. Replying to:

    See, there is a problem.  Truth is truth whether or not people are convinced or not.  This is where relativism creeps in and we can make ourselves "God" with what we perceive as the truth.  The Bible can speak for itself and it can prove itself.  Two thirds of it was prophetic when written, and it all came to pass (minus the things still yet to come).  The truth is that I love gays in spite of their lifestyle.  It doesn't matter to me if they believe me or not.
    (That make’s sense and I do believe you when you say you do not hate gays. But we are not talking about you by yourself we are talking about your entire church and faith in general. And you can not sit here and say that the majority of people who hate gays are church going people. Now I am not saying all gay haters are religious people but many are and that puts a stain on everyone who follows that same faith. Like it or not if you belong to the same group of people that bombs abortion clinics and hates gays then sometimes you will be lumped in with those people because you are a part of such a wide spread group. )Tony Dungy is a black man he should understand more then anyone what it means to have the same rights as everyone else but instead he chooses to follow blindly and go with the "word of god" and rob these people of their rights. Replying to:

    Sexuality is a learned behavior.  I know that is debatable.  But ask a psychologist.  To place one's sexual preference/choice on the same level of skin color and the struggle that minorities have fought for, takes away from that struggle.
     (People don’t choose to be gay they are just gay it’s just who they are. A fat person chooses to be fat when they refuse to watch what they eat or go to the gym, that is a choice but gay people are born gay and that’s just who they are and there is nothing wrong about it. I get what you are saying I just don’t agree. It is just as wrong to persecute gays as it is to persecute people of color.  Gays don’t choose to be gays just like black people don’t choose to be black that’s just the way they are born.)

     
    I would rather think for myself then be told what to think by a book writen by a bunch of power hungry white men.Replying to:

    How do you know they were power hungry?  Have you studied their lives?  They didn't rule over anyone, they preached.  No one can tell you what to think.  A premise is suggested, arguments are put forth, and you make a decision based on what is reasonable.  Seems to me that you may have been reading the Bible with your conclusions already firmly planted in your mind.
     (You are right, I don’t know that they were power hungry so I take that back, but  have to disagree when you say that the church doesn’t tell people how to think, they most defiantly do. They tell you how to think and how to live, maybe not all church going people live exactly the way the church would want them to live but if they had it there way you would all follow blindly. And if I can ask what arguments are put forth? When was te last time you were in church during a sermon and someone stood up and challenged what the preacher was saying? I have never seen anyone question anything at Church in my entire life. So what argument is put forth exactly? And I read the bible when I was a young man and I had not made up my mind on religion at that time so you are wrong about that. If anything I made my choice to not be a part of organized religion after reading it. I do think a person needs the church to speak with god and I do not think god needs or wants us to spend our small time on this Earth worshiping him or anyone else for that matter. That’s just the way I see it. I do not see a need for the church what so ever, maybe 12000 years ago people needed answers and someone to guide them but if I want to talk to god I talk to him and that is that.) I do beleave in god, Replying to:

    The Bible says that demons believe too.  It doesn't matter that you believe if you do nothing with that belief.  Faith has to be acted upon.  If I believe I'll get killed if I walk onto the highway, but still walk onto it, I really didn't have a belief that changed me.
     (Did you just call me a demon? Really? So because I don’t follow your faith I am a demon? That’s a real bad way to look at it. People are different that does not make me or anyone else a demon. It does not matter if I believe if I don’t act on it? Yea according to you and your church but I don’t care what your church thinks so it matters to me, I can believe in god and not devote my life to him, that’s the way I look at it and I believe everyone has a right to see god in their own way. If I was a Muslim would I be a demon for acting on my faith in a different way? Do I have to be the same as you in order to not be a demon? BS. Not everyone see’s god in the same way. You actually managed to offend me on this one unless I took what you said in the wrong way but that’s the way it looked to me.) I do think there is something bigger then us out there however I do not believe in organized religion. Replying to:

    Yes, it has it's problems, but the Bible says that Jesus loved the Church enough to die for it, so I choose to do the same, in spite of the problems.
     (are you kidding me? Jesus loved people enough to die for them it has nothing to do with the church. Get over yourself I mean the church not you of course. It has its problems? Like letting their priests get away with touching little boys? How long was that going on before they put a stop to it? The very men put in charge of teaching kids “the way to god” were touching them making sure they kept quiet about it. That’s more then a small problem. What about the fact that the church led a campaign in like 17th century or whenever where they killed any women who thought for herself and proclaimed that they were witches, were those women not gods children? And I won’t ever get into the despicable actions of the church during the holocaust in WW2. Those seem like more then just a  few little problems.)I dont think Dungys hate for gays has anything to do with my original post what so ever but someone opened this can of worms so i had to add my two cents. Replying to:

    Glad you did.
    (I am glad as well it’s a good conversation)Im sorry if i offend you but this is just the way one person thinks. Replying to:

    No offense taken.
    I do not see Dungy "logic" because i think he is stupid for his faith (again I am sorry if this offends you) so we will never see eye to eye on his reasoning because I just dont see it the same way you do. Replying to:

    Faith and logic often bang heads, but i think it comes from misunderstandings.  I'm not offended by your viewpoint.  It would be disingenuous for me to say that I respect it though.  I don't respect a viewpoint that I don't agree with, just like you don't respect mine (or Dungy's).  However, I fully respect your right to have that viewpoint (and I do belive that right will soon be eroded).  I spent 24 years in military servcice doing my part so you and I can have these viewpoints and have this discussion.  Bur don't mistake my lack of respect of your viewpoint as disrespect for you or your worth as a person.
     (You get much respect from em as well, its an honor to be in this debate with someone who spent 24 years fighting for my freedom so I truly respect you for that)You ask why we Americans think its ok to dump 12000 years of being anti gay maybe its because that book was writen 12000 years ago. Are we as humans the same people we were 12000 years ago or have we progressed over the years? Replying to:

    If you can show me, apart from technology, how we have progressed, I'll listen.  We still have murders, rapes, thefts, lying, hatred...and the list goes on.  Technology doesn't make us better.  It often makes better at being evil.  There is nothing progressive about sin.
     (Are you including Science as technology? Because science has progressed greatly in the last 12000 years and Science can explain and give answers to many of the questions people had 12000 years ago. In fact if we had our science now back then I am sure the bible would not have last this long. People wanted answers they didn’t have so they followed the bible but science can answer most of those questions now. We do still have murders and r apes and all that you are correct but that is human nature. Some people are evil and some people are not. The Church can’t fix that and neither can anything else. But you know what how many church going people beat their kids? How many church going people r ape there kids or other kids? Or kill themselves? Or kill others? You act as if these crimes are beyond religious people but in fact how many times a year does someone blow up an abortion clinic or some other thing.  I am just trying to say its not like evil does not show up with religious people as well. Just because a person goes to church or doesn’t go to church does not mean anything in the grand scheme of things, some people are evil whether they find religion or not. But I have gotten off topic, my main point is that science has progressed over the last 12000 years which in turn has helped us as people progress.)Like I said if you think that it is the true word of god then of course you will still listen to a 12000 year old book but for those of us who do not buy into it it seems stupid to blindly follow a book writen 12000 years ago. Either way the reason this whoel gay subject came up was because someone said he hated gay people and someone said where is your proff that he hates gays and then I said we dont need any proof, he has opened his faith up to the public and all we need to know is that he is a church going man to know how he fels about gay people. Now you can throw your arms up in teh air all you want and get mad but the simple fact is even though you think its ok to say "well i dont hate gays i just dont think they deserve the same rights as everyone else" to us people outside of the church all that is saying is i dont think gay people deserve the same rights as everyone else which to me is hate. Replying to:

    Ok then, where does it end?  What if I want to marry my dog?  Or a little boy?  Or my sister?  You may think that is absurd (and I agree), but it wasn't too long ago that people thought the same thing about gays marrying.  You know it will never stop.  NAMBLA is working hard to legalize their agenda.  Why would you discriminate against them or your neighbor that wants to marry his cow?  Carry the argument to its "logical" conclusion.  Sin is never satisfied.
     (If I were a gay man I would be insulted that you just compeered one man marrying another man to a person marrying a dog. Really? So now being gay is in the same category as b estiality? And by the way you can legally marry your pet in some states and it is not nearly as big a topic as gay marriage. Which says a lot to me, people don’t care if you marry your dog but two men getting married and it threatens your way of life? That is so backwards. And its only a sin to you and other’s like you to me there is nothing wrong with gays getting hitched what so ever. And for you to compeer gay marriage to those creeps who want to molest little kids is just wrong. Two adult people entering into marriage of there own free will is completely different then a older man taking advantage and or brain washing a little kid into thinking its ok for an adult to have sex with a kid. Do you really consider them the same thing? If so that is screwed up)Dress it up all you want but if you think that way you are a bigit. Gay or not everyone has a right to be happy Replying to:

    Happy?  Happy?  Since when do I have a right to be happy?  I have a Constitutional right to pursue happiness, but happy is up to me.  How is the government going to ensure I'm happy?  What if I refuse to be happy?  Is the Government liable?  Happiness comes from inside and not from a piece of paper that says your man and wife or man and man or wife and wife.  I have no right to be happy.  There are plenty of unhappy people due to numerous reasons.  This is a non-argument.
     (So we all have the right to pursue happiness but not gays? Is that what you are saying? You might be right we might not ever be truly happy but we all have a right to try and make the best of things and TRY TO BE HAPPY and you wotn even allow gays the same right to TRY to be happy with each other. And why because you think it’s a sin? Who the heck are you? (I don’t mean you I just mean people in general) So you think it’s a sin? Great for you why should what you think have any bearing on what two adults want to do with their lives? What makes you so important? )and for someone to deny a person that right because the book they happen to follow as faith tells them it was not ok for gays to be married 12000 years agov its just the same as a member of the KKK saying blacks cant do this or that because they are not teh same or as strong as the white man. Replying to:

    Sorry, can't agree.  It's not the same thing.  I can't track with you on this one.
     (All I was doing was restating a point that Pmike made which was, if you belong to a group of people like say the KKK and you don’t hate jews but the majority of people in the KKK do hate the Jews then you will be lumped in with them because you choose to be a prt of that group. You might not hate gay people but many inside your church do and so if you are a member of that religion you will be lumped in with them. If I was a member of a group and I didn’t agree with something as big as hating gays I would leave that group.)Its the same thing and even if you dont hate gay people it is re tarded of you to pretend that there are not millions of church going people out there who do in fact hate gay people. Replying to:

    I'm sure there are people that do hate gays, just as there are people who hate people of different skin color.  I'm not denying this.  But the way to get over it is not by avoiding Church.
     (I don’t avoid the church for that reason, I avoid the church because I do not believe in organized religion. I don’t need the church to tell me how to warship god I can do that on my own thank you.)And as far as you know Tony Dungy is one of those people. Replying to:

    Unless you know this for sure and have evidence, then it is just your opinion.
     (Very true I have no proof he is one of those people but because he is a part of a church that hates gay or has many people within it that hate gays he will be counted among them. If he does not like it he should find a new church.)He spare headed a campaign to make sure gays did not get the same rights as everyone else so why is wrong for one to assume he hates gays? Replying to:

    Trying to pass a law that protects marriage is not the same as hating gays.  Why don't you accuse gays of hating traditional believers in marriage?  It's the same argument in reverse.  Why am I the hater and not the gay activist?  Completely hypocritical don't you think?
     (I am sorry did I miss something, are gay people trying to make it so “normal” people cant get married? Did they spare head a campighn to try and make it so Tony Dungy couldn’t get married? No they didn’t it was him and his people who did it so that’s why they are hater’s and gays are not. Gays are not trying to stop you from doing anything but you are trying to stop them from something so that is how it is different.)And Underdogg i have no idea why you would list teh fact that Tony Dungy worked with George W. Bush as a good thing, if anything its a mark against him that he would let his name even be in the same sentence as that greedy no good POS George W Bush. Replying to:

    Ahhh, for another time.
    (Please don’t tell me you are a supporter of the worst president to ever sit in the white house? But you are right that is another topic for another time.)But once again all this gay stuff is way off point what we are talking about is whether it is ok for Dungy to only try and help men of teh same color as himself. If Bob Kraft went out of his way to help only white people would he or would he not be called a racist? So again do you think he would put his neck on the line for a white player teh way he did with Vick? cause i dont and if you do think he would what makes you think so?
    Posted by MVPkilla


    I'd say if Dungy or Kraft said that they would ONLY help peopl of their own color, they might be able to be considered racist.  As far as I know, Dungy has not said this or done this.
     

    (You are right he never said he wouldn’t help white people, which is why I have said over and over again that mostly I am mad at the papers and reporter who keep saying stuff like “Dungy is such a good person for going out of his way to help young black people” that drives me insane, I am sorry but I work with kids, and I don’t do it because I like helping white kids, or because I want to help black kids I do it because I want to help kids in general. All kids, skin color is not an issue. And I also don’t buy into the whole “young black men have it so much harder” everyone everywhere has it hard and everyone could use a hand skin shouldn’t have anything to do with it.)

    Thanksfor the thread, and God bless.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Taz - you believe in God but not organized religion - why?  Why would God reveal himself only in the inner hearts and minds of people, rather than objectively through, say, words that all people could follow for all time?  Your way doesn't make sense to me - if your only knowledge of God is when you're having quiet thoughts, how do you know which thoughts are God and which are just your own?  What I'm saying is, if there is a God, and he cares about people and wants to help them, don't you think he'd make it obvious to everyone who he is, rather than leave it to people to just figure it out on their own?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    No I do not Mighty. First of all I do not think that if there is a god that he would require people to warrship him. I just dont see it, I do not think that god would judge people based on the rules made by the church. I obviusly think that if you kill someone you will burn in hell, but do i think I will be sent to hell for not going to church or for swearing to much? No I do not. I beleave that there is a god and i also beleave that he created man and that was it, I do not think he sets on our path or anything like that. I think god made man and gave man a brain and from there it was up to man to use his brain thats what i think. I think orginized religion is currupt, maybe when man first came up with the idea of church it was a noble cause and all that but over the years i think it became about power and control. history backs me up on this whether people like or not. The church has killed people in its name, they told people to kill any women who openly thought for herslef or challenged the church by calling them witches. The chruch covered up teh fact that its own people were molesting kids and do i even need to bring up the churches lack of action during WW2 when Hitler was killing off the jews? the church killed the great inventer Gallalawo (spelt wrong im sure) for saying that the sun was teh center of the universe, they had him killed for not taking it back after he said it and they did not admit they were wrong for doing this until 1994!!! It took them over 100 years to admit they were wrong for killing him. The list goes on and on. I do not need a church to talk with god or to understand that there is something out there bigger then me. I dont need to be told how to think or what i can and can not do. I dont expect everyone to agree with me, this is just the way i see it.

    Why would god reveal himself only to the hearts and minds of people? I personally think god reveals himself in all kinds of ways. God is everywhere as far as i am concerned, he is in the air and the trees. How do I know which thoughts are mine and which ones are gods? do you think god is some kind of super hero or something? projecting himself into our minds? You know how i work out which thoughts are mine and which are his? thats easy they are all my thoughts. God didnt give us a brain so he could control it. And you are acting like people wouldnt know who god was without the church and thats not so. Maybe in the beginning we needed to spread the word but right now in 2009 if you dont know who god is you are re tarded.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from boston006. Show boston006's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    WHO Cares what Dungy thinks of Michael Vick...  What about the poor DOGS???  Who is going to give the poor Dogs a 2nd Chance???  Maybe everyone forgot about what this is really all About...  Football is one thing what M V did to the Poor Dogs is another thing.  Do you really think he is Sorry???  (NOT)...
      
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Sorry, I thought you were saying you commune with God privately, through quiet moments or whatever, so I said that stuff about your thoughts and all.  Anyway, the same principle applies if you say God reveals himself through nature or whatever - what does that tell you about him?  That he loves humans because he gives us sunshine, flowers, and grassy meadows?  Or that he hates humans because he gives us (the 5 billion who don't live in the first world) famine, pestilence and natural disaster? 

    What I'm saying is, if there is a God, he's the most important thing in existence, so I'd like to know as much about him as I can, and the Bible says a lot.  So what do you claim to know about him?

    Oh and as for the sins of the church, you don't need to look at recent history to see it.  Flip to almost any random page in the Bible, Old or New Testament, and the pages will be filled with the sins of the members of the church, be they the leaders or the slaves.  But God still commands that we worship him through the church, despite the sins of its members because, according to the Bible, God reveals himself through and is present in those who believe in him - so you can know God by being in a community of believers.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from bubthegrub2. Show bubthegrub2's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    [QUOTE]WHO Cares what Dungy thinks of Michael Vick...  What about the poor DOGS???  Who is going to give the poor Dogs a 2nd Chance???  Maybe everyone forgot about what this is really all About...  Football is one thing what M V did to the Poor Dogs is another thing.  Do you really think he is Sorry???  (NOT)...   
    Posted by boston006[/QUOTE]


    Unfortunately most of them are dead. They did take some dogs to shelters and homes to try and "deprogram" them. It worked well in some cases, and not so good in others. The post was really about Dungy, and not Vick. But I agree, the poor dogs are the losers and the press has a field day with it all. The hope is that maybe working together these two could help educate the kids who grow up in these cultures. Though he can't "undo the deed", he can help prevent like incidents in the future. The breeding and training of these dogs is the real crime. But maybe if the new generation doesn't carry on old "traditions", it would decrease the demand for the dogs. I have three dogs myself, and I'd get censored if I posted what I would do with that scumbag Vick if I had him here in SC!!!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from prairiemike. Show prairiemike's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    A community of believers, perhaps, like these guys . . .


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tym0MObFpTI
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yapple. Show Yapple's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    "I do not need a church to talk with god or to understand that there is something out there bigger then me. I dont need to be told how to think or what i can and can not do. I dont expect everyone to agree with me, this is just the way i see it. 
    Why would god reveal himself only to the hearts and minds of people? I personally think god reveals himself in all kinds of ways. God is everywhere as far as i am concerned, he is in the air and the trees. How do I know which thoughts are mine and which ones are gods? do you think god is some kind of super hero or something? projecting himself into our minds? You know how i work out which thoughts are mine and which are his? thats easy they are all my thoughts. God didnt give us a brain so he could control it. And you are acting like people wouldnt know who god was without the church and thats not so. Maybe in the beginning we needed
    to spread the word but right now in 2009 if you dont know who god is you are re tarded."

    Problem is, there are many people just like you who control Congress, the courts, business, industry and now, even the military is being turned into a traveling tent show. Their beliefs are unshakable and they operate under the security blanket of fear and safety-in-numbers.
    Anyone who disagrees with them is an unpatriotic whacko.
    Even those who aren't religious have found it expedient and profitable to pretend to be so.
    These people make the laws, pass judgment on others and find it easier to make the decision to send young people overseas to get their appendages blown off because they first had a private and privileged consultation with the almighty.
    You remind me of the tornado survivor. She sits there, among the rubble, thanking the lord for sparing her life...conveniently overlooking her dead neighbors. Who killed them? Were they non-believing sinners or just dumb unfortunate atheists? 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from MVPkilla. Show MVPkilla's posts

    Re: A question about Dungy

    Sorry, I thought you were saying you commune with God privately, through quiet moments or whatever, so I said that stuff about your thoughts and all.     Anyway, the same principle applies if you say God reveals himself through nature or whatever - what does that tell you about him?  That he loves humans because he gives us sunshine, flowers, and grassy meadows?  Or that he hates humans because he gives us (the 5 billion who don't live in the first world) famine, pestilence and natural disaster?   Listen man, as I said before I believe that god made man and then he gave man a brain and that is where he stopped. It is up to us to live our lives and make choices for ourselves.

    What I'm saying is, if there is a God, he's the most important thing in existence, so I'd like to know as much about him as I can, and the Bible says a lot.  So what do you claim to know about him?
     I disagree, god or no god I think man is the most important thing in existence. God gave us life and a brain to use to live that life and is what we do with our lives that’s important. And why by the way do you need to know as much about him as you can? Is it not enough for you to just believe he is there? I don’t need to know who he is or what he is or anything like that I just need trust in myself and know that is what god intended. That is just the way I see it.  You say you need to know as much about him as possible and that the bible “says a lot” well what I say to that is the bible was written by man not god. Say whatever you want but that’s what it comes down to, god had nothing to do with the bible except that he inspired it.

    Oh and as for the sins of the church, you don't need to look at recent history to see it.  Flip to almost any random page in the Bible, Old or New Testament, and the pages will be filled with the sins of the members of the church, be they the leaders or the slaves.
     Ok now imagine how many stories didn’t make the cut? How many “sins” do you think they have kept off the books? Nothing that has been around as long as the church has been can do so with out leaving a few skulls in the closet. Anyone who has ever challenged the church has been put through hell. In the old day’s legit killed people who did not shut up when the church told them to. They killed men of science simply because their findings didn’t match up with what the church was teaching people. The church might have been a good thing at one point but now and for the last few hundred years it has simply been about power.      But God still commands that we worship him through the church, despite the sins of its members because, according to the Bible, God reveals himself through and is present in those who believe in him - so you can know God by being in a community of believers. But god still commands that we worship him through the church? Yes according to the church. Unless you have personally talked to god recently and he told you this? If not then you are going on the word of the church that you need to worship god through them. I personally do not beleave this to be true, I can worship god just by living my life and doing the right thing when ever I can. Its like if this, if I own a fruit stand on this side of the road and you own one on the other side of course when people ask me I am going to say the only way to worship me is by only buying fruit from my fruit stand. Of course I am going to say that because I don’t want you to go across the street and buy fruit from the other guy. According to the church god demands that we worship through the church and if you want to take their word for it then you go right ahead but I don’t buy it.  “god reveals himself through and present in those who believe in him” so you can know god by being in a community of believers? First of all god is present in all of us, he loves all his children, right? So if he loves all his children he is present in all of us so church goers need to get off their high horse. Do you honestly think god would just abandon his children who do not have faith? If so what kind of god is he? I don’t think so I think he cares for all his children not just the ones who go to church.
     

Share