Please. Miss California answered a question from controversial blogger Perez Hilton on gay marriage. Gay marriage is a subject that prompts much disagreement, and while I am certainly on the side of gay marriage, let's remember that many of the most respected, progressive leaders in this country do not hold that view. President Barack Obama, for one, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, for another.
Miss California Carrie Prejean responded to a question at a beauty pageant about gay marriage. A beauty pageant. As anyone who watches these contests is well aware, the contestants very often seem pre-programmed in their responses, because months of training has to anticipate many of the questions. Miss California was clearly not expecting a question about gay marriage. She shouldn't have anticipated the question, because her views are irrelevant to most people and have little to do with the title of Miss USA.
So now there are those that want to clobber her for her (inarticulately stated) position against gay marriage. Let's remember that the country is divided on the issue. The gay marriage side has momentum. I'm of the belief that the argument against gay marriage is just nonsensical and that gay marriage will eventually be accepted in most of the country. Gay people are already getting married in a couple of states. Has your life changed at all? Do you view your heterosexual marriage any differently? Of course not. And hetero marriage has already been denigrated as an institution by heterosexuals. Ask Larry King, Britney Spears, or any of a host of people who view marriage as slightly more of a commitment than a New Year's Resolution.
But my position on gay marriage is not the point; neither is your position the point. The point is, we live in a free and sometimes civil society, in which people are free to express their views, and Miss California did not state that she would not let her kids around "queers" around her kids - that's Joe the Plumber. She stated that she was against gay marriage. Perhaps half the country shares her view.
Miss California is being bullied for her position on this issue, and on this, I agree with Elisabeth Hasselbeck. I heard the "View" co-hostess on "Larry King" last night, and she was talking about Miss California. She stated (if I recall correctly) that if the beauty queen was pro-gay marriage, she would not be the source of relentless rumors and media coverage. Elisabeth is right.
So now, in a further attempt to embarrass Carrie Prejean, there are semi-unclothed pictures of Miss Califonia hitting the Web, and who knows what's to follow. In the words of the great philosopher/basketball player Derrick Coleman, "Whoop-de-damn-do." She's a beauty pageant contestant - would it be a shock if she posed naked or semi naked? Haven't we been down this road already - more than 20 years ago, with Vanessa Williams, who lost her Miss America crown and turned out to be the most talented, articulate and famous Miss America of all?
Carrie may lose her crown because of her pictures. And if the rules say that you lose your crown for posing semi-naked, so be it. The rules are the rules. But these pictures are being brought to the fore because of her position on gay marriage. That's unfair.
All that will happen from this is that progressives will elevate Miss California into a position of more renown, and turn her into a poster child of liberal bullying for the right to hold over our heads. The left will hold torture over the right. The right will consider what is happening to Carrie Prejean torture - just wait and see. This bullying will be more offensive to the far right than waterboarding. Miss California will end up walking away from this with her head held high. Will the people who picked on her be able to say the same?
Meanwhile, she's a paragon of vanity and falsies.
It's easier to say you're a christian than to walk the talk.
I look at it this way: I don't even remember the name or state of the winner, Perez Hilton has helped make Prejean into the next Anita Bryant.
this is where the problem is. at the end of the day, you have a form of polarization and exclusion that is accepted even by the most liberal. Both Obama and Clinton have stated time and again that they still believe that marriage is between a man and a woman because of their spiritual beliefs. I don't care what their spiritual belief is since it doesn't apply to me and isn't there some kind of separation of church and state concept floating around since ummm....forever. CLEARLY, there's none of that so America why continue to pretend to be something you're not. if you're a bigot, reveal yourself.
If she would have let the issue end there, despite some ribbing by the media, she would have probably been off the hook.
However, now it is Miss California who is seeking to continue this discussion my becoming publicly involved with the National Organization for Marriage against marriage equality. She is using her fame from the Miss America pageant to further a political cause, and by doing so, she should expect the full scrutiny of the media and the general public.
Nobody is 'picking on' Miss California. She is using her position to further her personal views, and she needs to expect to be challenged for this.
It's also oxymoronic that she is a paragon of vanity while claiming to be a paragon of virtue.
Feels similar Marilyn Chambers doing Ivory Soap commercials at the same time she was doing Behind The Green Door. 99-44/100ths pure (but that 56/100ths sure is dirty).
Being wrong doesn't mean you deserve to be personally attacked in a vicious way. The fringe elements of the left are making it hard for those of us who share their position but not their irrational anger to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them.
i won't go as far as to say Ms Ca is a bigot(so far) but I think to call her hypocrite is fair.
The naked pictures are good, but the implants are a bad example to young women. The gay marriage opposition is also unfortunate.
It's not the kind effortless and airy congeniality I expect from a Miss California. It's not congenial for her to be against someone else's marriage.
I'm not unsympathetic to her plight. Perez Hilton is quite a revolting character, riding on the notoriety of Paris Hilton's name and always being obnoxious.
I love all Miss California's pious supporters who say she's a beautiful young woman "inside and out." She sure seems to have a lot of people inside of her.
As long as she is putting herself out there as the mantle holder on the definition of marriage. She should reasonably expect opposition to her views. Too bad you are uncomfortable with that Matt.
But she is kinda like a Sarah Palin- the teenage years. Besides if she can't stand the heat................
It's absolutely disgusting, and I don't mean her.
She's a Christian celebrity, and I know what that means from having gone to bible college and worked in a baptist church: You can lie, cheat, steal, murder and be generally despicable, and god will forgive you and transform your life and send you on the speaking circuit after you've written a book. But if you're a guy and you kiss or make love to one guy, you're out.
And no, Obama doesn't get a free pass. You may have heard about a little uproar around Rick Warren's place of honor at the inauguration. Obama's stance on gay marriage is either inexcusable bigotry or it's political cowardice, both equally repulsive.
So this whole thing about not picking on poor Miss California seems pretty sexist to me. If she was a male celebrity would you be defending her right to deny rights to other Americans?
but guess what.....everyone else has their right to their own opinion, and that can include their opinion of someone else's opinion....
What if she came out and denied the Holocaust? What if she called for another one?
Would it still be wrong for her to lose the beauty pageant?