New world heavyweight champion Tyson Fury appeared on Today With Sean O'Rourke on Tuesday morning to discuss his victory against Wladimir Klitschko and his Irish connections.
O'Rourke also questioned Fury - though not to the extent we would have hoped from an interviewer of his quality - regarding comments which the boxer made recently about homosexuality.
In an interview with the Mail on Sunday in early November, Fury equated the legalistion of homosexuality to the hypothetical legalisation of paedophilia.
There are only three things that need to be accomplished before the devil comes home: one of them is homosexuality being legal in countries, one of them is abortion and the other one’s paedophilia. Who would have thought in the 50s and 60s that those first two would be legalised?
When I say paedophiles can be made legal, that sounds like crazy talk doesn’t it? But back in the 50s and early 60s, for them first two to be made legal would have been looked on as a crazy man again. If I would have told you 120 years ago, that a 1000-tonne aeroplane is going to float through the sky, a piece of steel — ludicrous.
Perhaps prompted by O'Rourke's words, Fury claimed that he was misquoted by conductor of the interview, Oliver Holt.
On Newstalk's Off The Ball, the Mail on Sunday writer responded to Fury's assertion.
He was not misquoted. 100%, he was not misquoted.
I went through the tape again last night. Partly for my own interest, partly for an exercise to write my questions down beside his answers.
At the time, I was particularly careful because I realised these were not ordinary things to say. I was particularly careful.
Journalists are always careful when they're transcribing copy.
The 7,000 words of Tyson Fury over 40 minutes are not out of context. He's not misquoted.
I think sometimes when people say things that sometimes it looks different in black and white. Maybe people have advised him differently.
He has said several times that those are his beliefs.
You quoted the bit there where he says he follows the bible and the bible says it's wrong.
I don't want to rehash the piece over and over but I do say in it that it did feel like he swallowed the Old Testament whole.
That is, literally, his bible. That is what he believes. If he is saying that he doesn't believe that, then again, that's fine, we all change our opinions.
Holt also dismissed any suggestions that he used leading questions to manipulate Fury.
I mentioned an interview that he did with Donald McRae who works with the Guardian. In that interview, one of the main elements of that interview was a discussion about Fury suffering from bouts of depression or low moments where he felt like crashing his car into a wall at 100mph.
I just said to him that I'd read that interview and 'Was he in a better place now?'
That was it really. I didn't mention religion or God. His response to that question was that he was in a better place now and that he was in a better place now because he'd channeled his positive energies through God. He'd learnt that if he turned away from God, he turned into darkness.
That was what led to the stuff about homosexuality and paedophilia and the devil and the end of the world.
I didn't feel like it was even a leading question. It was a fairly banal question in some ways that led off on totally different path.
