A matter of faith

A lot of people are mad at Tony Dungy, of all people. The White House has invited him --"another gay rights opponent," as On Top magazine's Web site puts it -- to join its Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhoold Partnerships. Dungy spoke at a fundraiser for the Indiana Family Institute, which apparently is a subversive organization that preaches biblical values and biblical ethics:

 At the event, which came after weeks of dodging questions over his involvement with the group, Dungy publicly acknowledged his opposition to gay marriage: “I appreciate the stance they're taking, and I embrace that stance. ... IFI is saying what the Lord says. You can take that and make your decision on which way you want to be. I'm on the Lord's side.”

And Amercians United for Separation of Church and State "expressed disappointment."

Dungy, former coach of the Indianapolis Colts football team, has well-known ties with intolerant Religious Right groups.

[. . .]

Said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United's executive director, “I am surprised and disappointed that Dungy has been asked to serve on the council. His view that civil-marriage law should reflect religious doctrine is not in keeping with the Constitution.”

Whew. I feared that this controversy, which is fodder for so much enlightening debage, might disappear with the departure of Bush and election of Obama. Maybe Dungy can even add fuel to the fire by refusing to accept on the grounds that he and the president are so far apart on such matters. If Notre Dame won't stand up to him, let Tony do it!

This all misses the point anyway. If people want to argue with Dungy over his religiously inspired view on gay marriage, fine. It's hardly a fringe opinion, but there are good arguments that can be made against it. What should be the focus of debate is whether faith-based initiatives are a good idea. I'm no great fan of the federal government throwing billions of dollars at problems, but as a citizen, I would like, a a minimum, that the programs funded be effective at addressing whatever problem they're attempting to solve. Are faith-based programs more or less effective than other ones? I've heard arguments on both sides but haven't seen any convincing evidence one way or the other.