It ought to be perfectly normal for a person to state their support for the traditional idea of marriage, but things are topsy-turvy these days.

As you will recall, I praised Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy for standing up to homosexualist activists who criticized him for accepting an award from the Indiana Family Institute. I somehow missed the subsequent report that Dungy has now openly stated his personal opposition to proposals to change Indiana state law to force individuals and businesses to acknowledge "marriages" of same-sex couples.

This is good news, and I bring it to you in case you missed it.

USA Today reported as follows:

Indianapolis Colts coach Tony Dungy said he knows some people would rather he steered clear of Indiana’s gay marriage debate, but he clearly staked out his position nonetheless.

The Super Bowl-winning coach "embraced" the stance of an Indiana organization supporting an amendment to the state constitution that would ban gay marriages, and he added Tuesday night at a gathering of the Indiana Family Institute that he’s "on the Lord’s side."

"We’re not trying to downgrade anyone else," said Dungy, coach of the Super Bowl champion Indianapolis Colts. "But we’re trying to promote the family — family values the Lord’s way," Dungy said. "IFI is saying what the Lord says. You can take that and make your decision on which way you want to be."

The USA Today story said Dungy characterized his opinion on the matter as not a dislike of homosexuals but as a position arising from his religious faith:

The coach said his comments shouldn’t be taken as gay bashing, but rather his views on the matter as he sees them from a perspective of faith.

It’s important to bear in mind that what Dungy is doing is defending a liberal position: he wants the government to refrain from forcing people to acknowledge unions between homosexuals as marriages.

This is the essential point. Where the use of force is proposed is against those who don’t want to have anything to do with homosexual marriage.

The matter at hand is whether the government should force people to accept and acknowledge "marriages" between same-sex individuals.  

No one—repeat no one—is making any effort whatever to stop homosexuals from having marriages performed in any kind of ceremony they may choose. That is not at issue.

What people do object to is changes in the law that would force people to acknowledge these unions as marriages.

There is no practical need whatever for such laws. Insurance companies, for example, can allow benefits for such couples if they wish, but the government doesn’t force them to do so. That is exactly as it should be.

The ones who are trying to force these "same-sex marriage" laws on a decidedly unreceptive population are the ones who are against liberty in the matter.

And they should be characterized as the tyrants they are.