Tuesday, May 5, 2009


It's no secret that I am all for allowing marriage rights to gays. When I heard that Miss California had offered her contrary opinion during the Miss USA pageant I was slightly annoyed. I was even more annoyed when I saw a clip from the pageant: Prejean starting off with a decent answer and then degenerating into a nincompoop (you are representing the USA, which encompasses all opinions, honey, learn audience sensitivity) and Perez Hilton for setting her up with a loaded question (considering he is a homosexual and apparently only satisfied with--and expecting--one answer).

My opinion of the whole situation has not improved.

I read Perez's blog on a daily basis and am sick of him picking on her. It is getting really old. However, she is doing nothing to improve her image by attaching herself to the No Offense Campaign (AKA National Organization for Marriage), who are the people who put out the Gathering Storm video that Stephen Colbert wonderfully mocked.

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Colbert Coalition's Anti-Gay Marriage Ad
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorGay Marriage

Now, Prejean has this. (For you lazies, her boobies are in pictures.)

Anyway, what has this world come to when a person cannot openly state that she was raised in a home that valued marriage between a man and a woman? How intolerant of us, huh? We should learn to be more open-minded of other peoples' opinions, belief systems, and lifestyles.

Oh, wait.


Renee said...

How funny to see you writing about this, because I JUST watched her talking about how she's never claimed to be perfect, therefore she's not a hypocrite, and people are only looking to expose her, because she stands for good values, and my brain turned to mush trying to process all of it.

I don't get Miss California. At first, I thought, okay that's cool that she didn't say something she didn't believe, just because she wanted a crown, but then I just can't get behind her message. And I think she showed a lot of disrespect to the actual winner by saying that her comment was the only reason she didn't win. (yes, I'm a little hung up on the actual pageant aspect of this controversy).

But even moreso, I think it's gross that she is acting like she's the victim here.

Not at all well played, Miss C. Not even a little bit.

Tornado_Chaser said...

I'd have to say I would probably be considered the Adversary on this blog most of the time, but I agree with you completely here.

I think it is entirely insensitive and hypocritical of these defense of marriage organizations to get so defensive (pun) when they're criticized for their opinions. What do they think they're doing?

A point I always bring up when I get into these arguments (because I'm Mormon and think it was wrong of my Bishop to expect that the Young Single Adults Wards on campus would go to the capital to support prop 102) is that I highly doubt God (because thats who they think they're speaking for) wants us to be so willing to pass legislation against our fellow man. Although I hate the word because of its overuse--this is truly discrimination.

I don't believe God would would that, nor do I think the government should be used like that. Legislation against drunk drivers is one thing--they actually are a threat.

Legislation against gay people is just dumb.

MrPolyglot said...

I think I have a very different opinion of her response...granted I haven't completely followed the aftermath, but I watched the question and response when it came out.

Miss CA was given a question that is highly sensitive and highly personal and I don't think should have been a question worth asking. They may have well asked "What do you think about abortion?". This is a highly divisive topic and there's no real good way to answer it.
It reminds me of the VP debates and when that question was aksed- both Biden and Palin chose to skirt around the question and not answer it. It offends both sides in one way or another and a curt response in a Miss America contest is not the place to make an issue of it.(like they're now doing).
When she was asked the question she had two choices:
1) Don't answer the question and give some fluffy politician response OR
2)Be respectful, but honest.
I think she was trying to say "In my family, this is what we believe": she first said in her country... but corrected with my family...
I must say that the question was not a fair one... but a truly polished politician could have given a more solid response than was given without offending either side... something along the lines of "I'm proud of my country's democratic process and the ability that states have to decide their laws. I hope that each state and citizen will take this issue seriously and decide what they think is best..." then maybe put her bit in about what she believes.
.... just my two cents..

EmperorDarTea said...
This comment has been removed by the author.