Miss California Controversy

Look for Carrie Prejean paraphenalia at Christian bookstores and websites everywhere.

She might become the first contestant to launch a more successful career by being runner-up than winning.

We should care about what a runner up to Miss USA says when it reflects the false and bigoted belief system shared by so many people in this country. Ms. Prejean was simply incorrect when she asserted that we live in a country where we can choose to keep marriage between a man and a woman or make it available to all. That is nonsense. There are very few places where we can choose gay marriage if we want to-- it is illegal almost everywhere. In addition, it is outrageous that so many people in our country, including Ms. Prejean, would use the legal system to force everyone else to adopt their religious views regarding marriage. We are supposed to live in a land of religious freedom enshrined in the constitution. What type of government is desired by Ms. Prejean and her supporters? Apparently a Taliban-like state run by a religious theocracy. That is definitely something all Americans should be concerned about.

Who gives a damn? Let the gay folks get married too. Why should us straight men be the only ones made to suffer!?

the more the left tries to control free speech, the more people will stand ready to defend their free speech rights...
lately seems more and more groups are losing their right to say what they want for whatever reason, case in point, the policemen on facebook...
why does the left care...
they should shut up and sit down...
we can make then SHUT UP and SIT DOWN in the 2010 elections...
show them your free speech...
vote them out...

Her answer took into account freedom of choice in this country and also gave a clear declaration of her own views without any gay bashing, so I don't see why her answer should have cost her the crown.

Perez comes out the loser here, taking her answer personally and being quite unprofessional in the process.

I'm surprised there aren't more comments on this topic, which always raises a s**tstorm. As for the contestant, she's entitled to say her beliefs, and the judges are entitled to award the crown to another contestant. From other media reports I've seen, it sounds like Miss Prejean felt the crown was hers to lose. Rather arrogant, don't you think?

Her comment was retarded. She said that she loves that she lives in a country where it is a choice, but in her mind there is no choice. She gave a politician's answer to the question, and that's why it is stupid. Not to mention 1) referring to heterosexual marriage as, "opposite", 2) Saying, "in my country" as though she were running for Ms. Universe and not Ms. USA, 3) Not realizing that it isn't actually a choice in "her country", let alone not a choice in her state.

Yes, South Carolina's answer was dumber, but you don't win awards for being the second dumbest contestant. This was supposed to have been re-branded into a "scholarship competition" that wasn't all about looks. Now you're arguing that her answer was only half retarded so she should have won because she looks good in a bikini? She didn't even answer the question!

that so many people seem to care so much about a beauty pageant contestant's response to a celebrity blogger's question on a TV show

Perversive or not. no matter what your opinion is, there are homosexuals living in the United States. I know it's hard to believe. I know a lot of people try and block it from their minds. But a percentage of homosexuals make up the U.S.. Miss California's answer offends me because she didn't practice her answer for this question. No matter your opinion you should ALWAYS keep your answer neutral. There's people in the U.S. that don't agree or read the bible. Again i'm offended that she alienated those people as well. Ignorance should not be representated by the winner of Miss U.S.A..

Funny how there is no mention of the foul words ("b*tch" and the "C word") Perez Hilton (fake name) called Carrie Prejean.

If a conservative called a woman, who was pro-gay marriage, a "b*tch" and the "C word", this article would be highlighting these insults and talking about the bigotry on the right.

REMINDER: Marriage between a man and a woman is the standard in this country. Prejean did nothing but recite the standard definition of "marriage". And for that, she is a b*tch and the "C word".

This is typical liberal fascism.

She should have kept her mouth shut. If her comment cost her the trophy, that's good.

When I was growing up a white employee could call a black employee the N-word and not only keep his job but go on being regarded as a gentleman. Now that same word will cause a post here to be rejected. The history of America since WWII is a steady deprecation of bigotry, and bigots are increasingly marginalized and unwanted. Bigotry toward gays has been the last one that remained acceptable, and now that's ending too.

But it's not a free speech issue, not at all; on the contrary, I *want* bigots to give voice to their hatreds so the rest of us can correctly identify them and shun them.

I would be outraged if her answer cost her the crown -- and I don't particualry care about gay marriage one way or the other!!! The contestaent seems to have exhibited the finest quality of appreciation for others views and rights, even if they differ from he own. And she further showed the finest quality of honesty in stating her own beliefs. She did this without any particular self-righteousness.

If we are so intolerent as to feel that unconditional acceptance of a particular point of view is essential, then we have lost both the way of our own constitution and the very tenets of our valuies which allow same-sex marriage to be discussed without villification in the first place.

Perez should find another line of work than judging. And the pageant should find better judges (that is, ones without their own political and social agendas to put ahead of the impartiality of their position)

First off, I think it's pathetic that Perez had to use the Miss USA media outlet to push his agenda. Second, I think it's hilarious that he didn't get the answer he wanted.

I think it's sad and outrageous that an American cannot stand up for her beliefs without being ostracized. She cleary states, "we are lucky where we can live in a land that we can choose", and "no offense to anyone out there." She was trying to be as PC as she could. She was asked that question and gave an honest answer, and for that I commend her. We want beauty pagent contestants to represent honesty, right?

Perez Hilton, the gay community, and close to half of America is being hypocritical. They can have their thoughts and beliefs on gay marriage but anyone who disagrees with them cannot? I thought we were "lucky to live in a land that we can choose"...what religion to practice, who and what to vote for, etc.

Does this not outrage anyone else?

Everyone that is defending her, please go back and review the video. The question was a yes or no question. She never said the word yes or no. How is she supposed to win an award for answering a question that she never actually answered? She said we live in a country where we have a choice. Who has the choice, we the voters, or we the individuals who choose who to marry? She said she believes a marriage is between a man and a woman. Does that mean that she is going to marry a man, or that she is going to make sure that men cannot marry men and women cannot marry women?

Her sentences were poorly structured, showed a complete lack of knowledge about her own country, and never answered the question. Just because you're "pro-marriage" does not mean you have to defend all others that are also "pro-marriage." According to FOX News, she was ahead in, "evening gown" and "bikini" portions of the contest. You know, I think the question and answer portion should be more important than hottest chick.

If Ms. Prejean had said she supported gay marriage there would be no controversy, no appearance on the Today Show. She dared to step outside the artificial lines of politically correct speech with an honest answer and was critized. Those who preach tolerance and acceptance, such as gay rights groups, should practice it themselves.

What Miss California and her right-wing cheering section miss is the fact that, while every American enjoys the right of speech free from government interference (up to a point), none of us enjoys freedom from criticism by those who disagree with us. Miss California was welcome to her opinion, but when she elected to use the forum given to her by the pageant to express it, she opened the door to criticism. There is an old saying with which she needs to be familiar - "if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

And, isn't the Right being just the teeniest bit disingenuous? Imagine the uproar on Fixed Noise (et al.) had she said she believed in gay marriage and thought the so-called "Biblical" standard was nonsense.

Some dweeb wrote "REMINDER: Marriage between a man and a woman is the standard in this country. Prejean did nothing but recite the standard definition of "marriage". And for that, she is a b*tch and the "C word".

This is typical liberal fascism."

==

And in the 1860s people like you were saying that slavery for blacks was the standard around here, and that Emancipation was against what "everyone knows." You creeps were wrong then and you're wrong now.

As for "liberal fascism." that's a truly idiotic conjunction of words. You GOP trolls toss around words for their shock value and it's clear you don't even know what you're writing. Wasn't that a book by Man Coulter or one of those knucklewalkers?

I'm a liberal who supports gay marriage but I'm afraid that I can't get too offended by the any of this.

This is like having a celebrity talk about pesticide laws or a radio host talk about autism. In all of these cases I have to ask:
1. Does this person know what they are talking about? Are they any more knowledgable on this subject than me (or my shoe)?
2. Is this person in a position to do anything? A person may be an idiot on an issue but if that person is "Senator Idiot" then it may matter a great deal.
3. Is it this person's job to make outrageous statements?

Perez Hilton was made a judge in the Miss USA because they are starving for ANY kind of buzz and he delivered exactly what was requested of him. Miss California's response was not what I would say and it was not well received by the audience. Many people have strong feelings about gay marriage and this gives us a chance to talk about it some more.

So, from my scoreboard for Perez ad Ms. Prejean:
Question 1: Perez-yes, surprisingly. Ms. Prejean-not so much.
Question 2: No and no.
Question 3: Yes and yes.

I think we're done here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klT0aSRTuDQ&feature=related

He didn't use the C word, he only said the B word. Get your facts straight. He also clearly said that she didn't lose the crown for disagreeing with him, she lost the crown for being unable to answer the question in a logical, fact based way. We don't live in a country where you can choose. She should know that.

what we should be offended about is perez calling her a dumb b!tch and the media not calling him onto the carpet about it. Funny Obama has the same position, don't see any of the gay rights nuts calling him a dumb b@astard.

What was offensive was the judge calling the contestent the "b" word on his blog. How come no one is addressing his behavior. She just answered the question honestly, with a lot of tack, knowing full well that she would likely be punished for it. That takes guts.

Furthermore, her answer jives with what the majority of Americans think about the definition of marriage, including those in "progressive" California, and, the President of the United States. This is PC, the left wing, and the gay community gone amuck - they are the ones who should be taken to task on this.

The focus on the contestant, as though she did anything wrong, is shameful.

First Perez Hilton is a joke, What I'm trying to figure out is why so many people take this obvious far left and over the top blogger seriously.

What is offensive is those that bash the young lady for simply stating her own opinion. It is an opinion and everyone has one.

In this case Perez Hilton is going to find not many are really that sympathetic with him on this issue. As the majority are still firmly against the idea of gay marriage.

The final point is this, we do not have the right to judge anyone for their opinions, choices or life style. So the far left and the far right really need to get over it.

I am so tired of hearing all this right wing crap about how unfair the question about gay marriage was to Miss California, Carrie Prejean, and how there was no good answer. Actually, the question was fair especially given she is supposed to represent all of the people of California, not just her personal beliefs. By holding that title she is taking on the responsibility of being a goodwill ambassador and as such needs to be able to exercise tact and diplomacy. A far better answer would have been, "Before I could make such a public comment I would need to first sit down with representatives of both sides of the issue so I can have a better understanding of the ways in which both sides are effected. If I am selected as Miss USA I will make it a priority to do just that and then I may be able to answer that question for you". If she does not have the with it all to think fast on her feet and be diplomatic, she doesn't have what it takes to be Miss USA and rightfully lost her chance at that crown.

I'm more offended by Prejean's poor grammar ("we live in a land that you can choose same sex marriage or opposite marriage" ???) than her personal opinion, to which she is, after all, entitled. I'd like to think that the first place contestant won because she was a bit more articulate. I'm all in favor of gay marriage AND education.

I do not think her answer made her lose. Come on people this is a contest on how good you LOOK not brains! I know the ole saying is They do it for scholarship money right? Well I do not know of a learning instution that admitts you soley on your looks and so called talent do you? Most of the girls couldn't hold a decent conversation unless it was about make-up!

Oh, forgive me. He said he wanted to use the C word but he just said b*tch.

This makes all the difference in the world.

Never mind.

"opposite marriage"?? I guess eloquence isn't a requirement for being a beauty queen.

If I were the real ms. USA I'd be pissed that the loser was talking so much smack about how she should have won.

Of course she should not be crowned. YES, it does alienate almost fifty percent of the population in this country,
and YES, she's a moron.
There is nothing sacred about marriage.
Especially not in this country where millions of people tune in to watch shows like 'who wants to marry a millionaire?'.
it costs about 50 dollars to go to either vegas or your state office and sign paper work.
Elvis Presley and Martians marry people in this country so what's the big deal?
Anyone who wants to get married should and anyone who doesn't shouldn't.
If there are people who don't agree with gay marriage then they shouldn't have gay friends and they should mind their own business and keep their mouths shut.
That's what freedom is in this country. Its about the freedom to do your thing and not have a bunch of nosy big mouths in your face.

The Donald Trump should be FIRED for having P Hilton involved in This event

unless of course, he was hoping To generate some controversy and consequently some conversation

which it seems That This did

i Think all-non straight jacketed people should just go (edit) Themselves

ok, jk

Ignorance can NOT be Ignored
Intolerance can NOT be Tolerate
PC speech is Politically Incorrect

PH has The RIGHT To remain silent

She should have applied to be in the Miss Black America Contest where the answer is acceptable.

This is sarcasm for all you who don't recognize it. White folks are not allowed in black contests - and that's racism.

Further, Ms. Prejean apparently answered the question exactly correctly. Homosexuality is quite simply the sin de jure. This world sure is messed up!

One more observation. It sounded to me like the audience was applauding her answer, not booing. Does anyone else hear it that way?

"We shouldn't have to accept perversion of Marriage just because the perverts say we should."

--------------------

No but we'll have accept gay marriage when the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional to otherwise deny them.

Even perverts (including you) have rights too.

First I need you to forget what opinions you hold on the subject of gay marraige and instead read the question and the her answer.

Once done that then reflect on the fact that this became the sole basis for non-selection in the end, and furthermore the judge in this case then proceeded to vilify the contestant.

What does this say about the judge as a person? What does it say about us when we do not speak up about this - all of us I mean including the Post? Our Politicians?

Finally reflect on where we as a nation are heading by allowing such things to occur. Contemplate the result of such behavior is left unchecked. Is this really what we want?

The question I have is... Why is Perez Hilton a judge? Who takes Perez Hilton serious?
Why as a nation do we look up to people like this who have no real credentials?
I think if Perez Hilton is the new face and spokesperson for gay marriage...that is something to protest.
Perez should stick to the gossip and trash side of the media.

I rhought it is the same as Pres. Obama's
belief when it comes to marriage. "between a man and a woman" period.
By the way he also won the election right?

I am against gay marriage. I would like to ask Mr. Hilton if he would like to call me some foul words?

I'm confused. If a question is asked then why can't the contestants answer it honestly? Is there only one answer? So is the pagent rigged to support an agenda? Why was this contriversial question even asked? I think the criticizm should be aimed at the pagent not the contestant.

It's unfortunate that we are no longer allowed to have any opinion about anything anymore without worrying about offending somebody somewhere about something. She said that was her belief; she did not suggest that it was a belief that should have been shared at all. Why was she even asked about same-sex marriages? I find Judge Hilton offensive for even asking such a question, and she alienated millions of heterosexual Americans with this question.

"I think it's great Americans are able to choose one or the other."

In 46 out of 50 states in the US, they can't, and if Americans could already choose one or the other, there wouldn't have been any point in asking whether any other states should change their laws.

Produced an instant flashback to last year's airhead beauty constestant before she even announced where she stood on the issue.

Hello

This is plain and simple!!! SHE IS 100% RIGHT!!! She belives in God and the Bible. I belive that the human race was biult micro org in the oceans and we changed and the earth did. And on this world we have two genders ( MALE & FEMALE ) in the animal kingdom and the human kingdon. It is so we can reproduce! If we was suppose to reproduce a sexually Then on this world all animals and humans would be the same gender. So male/male and female/female is Dead Wrong!!!! You people have lost your way and need serious help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OLDSCHOOL WAYS

I sure wish I had been the reporter discussing this with Ms Prejean. I would have loved to have followed up her wounded-victim declaration:

"Because I had spoken from my heart, for my beliefs and for my God. ... It's not about being politically correct, for me, it's about being biblically correct."

With the following: "So it's about being biblically correct. I see, I know how important following the dicates of that book is to you all. So tell me, do you agree that misbehaving children should be stoned to death, as it commands in Deuteronomy 21:18-21? I'd love to hear the prospective Miss USA's views on the stoning to death of stubborn kids. Biblically speaking, of course."

It's amazing that the pushers of these Taliban Bronze Age hate scrolls are allowed by the media to selectively tout the passages that support their bigotry, while sweeping aside the ones that reveal their founding document to be a frightening, sociopathic manifesto.

Nobody else pushing political issues would be allowed that same kind of hypocrisy, I don't think. But the pseudochristians (who hate Christ's teachings, of course) are SPECIAL.

[QUOTE] "I knew that I was not going to win because of my answer," said Prejean, who was first runner up. "Because I had spoken from my heart, for my beliefs and for my God. ... It's not about being politically correct, for me, it's about being biblically correct."[END QUOTE]

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ms. Prejean certainly represents the majority of Americans and their views on marriage. Her bravery and commitment to say what is truthful and right in a world of marketing and hype will define who she is for the rest of her life. Thank you Ms. Prejean. The opportunity to say or do something that will positively impact millions may only come once and fleetingly in our lives, even at great cost to ourselves. You have met that challenge; in your case, a sacred challenge, and performed quite well.

What the alternative sex community fails to understand, is that its not their sexual preferences that are the fundamental issue. Its that their sexual behavior is perverse and society should not be forced to accept it in the name of "civil rights". Society has a right and obligation to enforce laws on behavior. Its alot different being black than it is behaving in a perverse sexual manner.

Re: stoning misbehaving children.

She would have answered from the New Testament: "He without sin may cast the first stone" - Jesus

Did I miss something here? Didn’t this Hilton guy ask for an honest response and then when she said what she (and a lot of others) believe she is punished. What a dirty trick. I knew there was some reason I don’t watch those baloney pageants.

Based on the quotation from Perez Hilton, there is a fair inference that he had a personal political agenda in asking the question. Assuming this to be true, then as a lawyer I find it difficult to believe the written rules of the Pageant fail to forbid any Judge from asking such a question.

Given President Obama's position on the issue, Mr. Hilton would apparently likewise consider the President disqualified from winning a beauty pageant, if not the Presidency perhaps, as his stance on the marriage issue is similar to Miss California.

In fact, I believe California Governor ARNOLD holds the same view on the issue of marriage. Would that disqualify him from winning an Oscar or a body-building contest?

It is revealing that Mr. Hilton, and his supporters, fail to see that he violated the basic fairness any contestant has a right to expect from a Judge.

Bottom line: Miss California is the victim of either a pageant that allows political agendas or a Judge who decided to impose his political agenda in violation of either the letter or spirt of the rule.

Either way, the bottom-line issue is not what Miss California said, but whether her Governor will put on his Terminator Hat and get a constituent justice. Or do we need to call Sarah Connor for this mission?

"It's amazing that the pushers of these Taliban Bronze Age hate scrolls are allowed by the media to selectively tout the passages that support their bigotry, while sweeping aside the ones that reveal their founding document to be a frightening, sociopathic manifesto."

Uh yea, Christianity is the taliban and a frightening sociopathic manifesto. Um yea, back to the cuckoo ward. But supporting people engaged in perversion and enshrining it into law is acceptable. Um yea ok, back to the rubber room.

Why was a gay MAN made a judge of FEMALE beauty in the first place??? A gay WOMAN would be a different story, but a gay MAN is ridiculous as a judge.
Any American gay can move to an Islamic country and see how his "rights" are interpreted under Sharia law.
Marriage has ALWAYS been between a MAN and a WOMAN all over the world. In other nations, homosexuals are sentenced to DEATH for practicing homosexual behavior.
If you are gay, I believe you should be able to have a commitment to each other, but NOT marriage. Yes, you should get visiting rights for when a partner is sick and in the hospital. YES, you should get a tax break for "co-habitation" etc. BUT, leave our marriage rites to the ones it was created for, a man and a woman.
If you are a gay man don't "judge" women. If you are a gay woman, don't judge MEN. That seems simple enough to understand and LOGICAL enough for anybody but a provocateur to understand.
I am "straight" don't ask me to judge MEN in a "beauty contest". That's NOT my thing.

1) Has anyone every heard of Sodom and Gommorrah? It wasn't a fairy tale, people. Wake up.

2) The middle road (aka being "politically correct") is unacceptable. Why should those with traditional values have to hide their feelings to accommodate those who sleep with the same sex? What is wrong with people these days? Has everyone gone mad?

3) Obviously, there are many people who still think traditional marriage should stand. Look at what happened with Proposition 8. Miss California fits in with the majority of people in the U.S. Why should the majority of the people have to cater to the minority by biting their tongues?

Hilton asked Prejean for her opinion on a current event. She gave it. He and the other judges were free to vote her up or down based on her answer.

What's telling is that Hilton couldn't simply say he found her views intolerant; he had to call her a "dumb b*tch." In a subsequent interview, he said, "I said the B word but I was thinking the C word." He embodies the very intolerance he claims to abhor, and does nothing for civilized discourse or the cause he claims to support.

Do not assume that you can infer my position on gay marriage simply because I think Prejean is entitled to her opinion and Hilton's reaction is the height of immaturity.

The only thing I can say is what this country will be like when the government takes control over everything

So much for free speech and having one's own opinion. I guess she is now listed on Obama's Homeland Security watch list as a prime candidate for being a home grown terrorist. Atlaest she had the fortitude to stand up for her beliefs and convictions, that's more than can be said for most of our politicians.

I can see this news article has its pros and cons. Then I see you have some of the pro and some for the cons. Then you have some who see both sides and some who see no sides " I like them best". Find me an article in the Washington Post or any other media group that everyone agreed with or disagreed with. Common people its human nature to find something to disagree about. Gays have been around since creation, the N word has been used one way or another for as long, and oh yeah before I forget there has always been a Cheney behind every great Bush, sheesh. p.s. before I forget she did look awesome in the swinsuit section and honesty will only get you probation if you're lucky.

PWAA, you've said nothing to address the damning scripture quoted in my post. Typical. The same section of the Bible that the English-speaking wing of the Taliban point to to validate their claim that some omniscient being disapproves of homosexuality, also commands them to STONE THEIR MISBEHAVING CHILDREN TO DEATH.

You cannot dispute this, so you go off on a tangent of names against me. Please address the issue I have brought up, or admit that the religious argument is one based on a flawed, and frankly sociopathic, document. Thanks.

Since when did the gays and liberals take over the Miss America pagent?

Odd. I was under the impression that freedom of speech was extended to all citizens of the United States, not just gays and minorities. Why is it exactly that this woman was criticized for answering the question honestly based on HER beliefs? I feel sorry for her. She was unjustly slammed for this comment. And who is this Perez Hilton person and who gives him the right to say what he said? Oh yeah, he's gay, so he can say whatever he wants to and get away with it because no one wants to offend him or violate his civil rights. Silly me! What was I thinking?

This pagent is old, outdated, shallow, superficial, and useless. I commend her for speaking her mind whether I agree with her or not. Mr. Hilton seemed to suggest that she lie in order to win. That offends me more.

Why on earth does anybody in this world care at all what either of these two bimbos think about anything?

I see the conservatives are blabbing on about this issue yet again. It amazes me that there's such a firestorm over something that doesn't affect anyone but the co-habitors. I have yet to see a down side to gay marriage except those created by the religious leaning public.

How do you say "Religious Fanatic"? It fits ALL religions, not just Muslims. Each sector is clamoring for their opinion to be THE law with some quotes from a questionable "publication" being used as a defense.

As for "traditional values"~ there are countries in this world where wives are chosen at birth, sold for money so there families can survive, are often under the age of 14 and many other "traditional values" that are not acceptable to many in the rest of the world. Even in the Western world, marriage at the age of 14 was not unheard of 3 or 400 years ago.

Someone should have told Miss California that she really DOESN'T have freedom of speech in this country. It tells us far more about the judges than it does Miss California. They asked the question but did NOT want her answer, but the "acceptable approved" answer.
The next contestant asked that question WILL give the approved answer.

To back up religious views, people should also say that it is biologically illogical for same-sex relationships. A male reproductive organ does not go into a bodily waste exit. Two female genetalia does not connect. I understand these are personal choices but it is not supported as scientifically correct.

Searchin4truth:

"Any American gay can move to an Islamic country and see how his "rights" are interpreted under Sharia law.
Marriage has ALWAYS been between a MAN and a WOMAN all over the world. In other nations, homosexuals are sentenced to DEATH for practicing homosexual behavior."

It's quite telling to watch conservatives reaching out to their ideological brethren in fundamentalist Muslim states for validation of their 15th century views. I have tried to point out your similarities to them here before, but it took one of you to put it this succinctly. I thank you for your honesty in stating your beliefs.

Quite frankly, if you want to redefine marriage to include other unions, bisexual triads and polygamist marriages should be legally recognized before gay marriages.

Reasons:
1. These relationships have both male and female role models for the children.
2. There are more adults to raise the children.
3. The "equal protection" claim used by gay activists also applies to these groups.

Let me clarify that I am against the redefining of marriage. But, if we are going to include other groups, gays should go to the back of the line.

IF MARRIAGE CAN MEAN ANYTHING, IT MEANS NOTHING. HENCE, WE HAVE THE DESTRUCTION OF MARRIAGE.

PWAA, you've said nothing to address the damning scripture quoted in my post. Typical. The same section of the Bible that the English-speaking wing of the Taliban point to to validate their claim that some omniscient being disapproves of homosexuality, also commands them to STONE THEIR MISBEHAVING CHILDREN TO DEATH.

Sigh, maybe this will get through but I doubt it. First off, those are old testament quotes . Second, if you can read the new testament and compare Christianity to the Taliban, you do have a screw loose. Third you are so submerged in perversion that you think following God's word is evil and supporting men screwing each other up the rear is normal.

She gave her honest opinion and for that she deserves credit. Wouldn't you rather she tell her truthful opinion than lie to possibly win the title? Geez!

Perez Hilton?! Really, what is his great contribution to society? Gossip? His comments don't win him a big dose of respect.

Carrie Prejean is simply echoing what the California electorate decided during the last election on Proposition 8, which clearly establishes that “marriage as a union between a man and a woman”. Why is she the one being cursed and not the majority who voted for the very same thing?

1. The questions should never have been asked. Regardless of your feelings about this, Hilton ambushed her with a politically charged question, probably knowing her answer in advance.

2. Her answer was well stated and any thing but confrontational. She expressed support for peoples right to choose same sex marriage, but declined to endorse it 100% because of deep felt religious belief. She didn't preach, se answered honestly.

3. In order to answer that question honestly and stick to her convictions demonstrates her moral courage. She stood up in the glare of the cameras, and the biggest moment of her life just a breath away, and had the courage to stand by her personal beliefs knowing full well it would not be a popular answer with Hilton.

I probably don't share her personal beliefs, but I can certainly respect her courage.

It is just semantics. As long as the same rights and privileges apply who cares what its called. You could call one "living in sin" and the other "living in slavery", as long as you get to pull the plug when your partner's a vegetable than the playing field is level.

Here is the actual scripture; Not surprisingly you paraphrased it and lost the meaning."

21:18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

21:19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

21:20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

21:21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

But like most people who don't read the bible you fail to understand the context. I always laugh when non believers take 2 seconds to read the bible and then act like biblical scholars...lol.

Ever notice how "in-your-face" and militant today's queers have become? They used to say that they did not wish to infringe on others values. That was when they were struggling hard for acceptance. Now, they attack anyone's religion or value system which does not fit in with their agenda. Too bad AIDS didn't work.

B2O2 Since you continue with the Bible bashing, I'll address you. Do you know the reason there is a New Testament and an Old Testament? In the Old Testament it also mentions an eye for an eye. What is your point? The purpose of the coming of Christ was to erase the old way of thinking; to show the true way to reach God, the Father. The Taliban worships Allah and practices various rituals on a daily basis in homage to Allah and the prophet Muhammad. Totally the opposite of how Jesus Christ (Christ as in the leader of Christianity) taught us how to worship. Of course you'll just spout out some hate back towards me because you don't know what you're talking about but I challenge you to at least know the Bible before you come to the conclusion that you need to criticize it. As far as the homosexual marriage issue goes as a whole, I don't particularly care for it and will vote against it till the day I die. However, as a Christian, I learned from the ways of Jesus to get over myself and love others regardless of how much I might have disdain for them in the flesh. Spirituality is very real and if anyone wants to challenge it, I say try prayer and fasting and see what happens.

This whole issue of being PC has got way out of hand. Miss Cali's preference in regard to marriage is to have it between a man and a woman. How can we say it's wrong to discriminate against those who desire same sex marriage and say it's wrong for someone to desire marraige between opposite sexes? She didn't say same sex is wrong, she said she does not agree with it because of her personal/spiritual beliefs. If people did not want to hear an honest answer then they should not have posed such a loaded question. People are losing their houses and the economy is in the crapper but the entire country is complaining about what some Californian blonde said in a beauty pageant competition!!!! And let's be honest, her words reflected how a good majority of Americans feel; those who don't care that people of the same sex enter in marriage even if they don't agree with it.

Can't see why what she said merits all the fuss: who cares what the California entry in a human dog show has to say about moral and political issues?
Is anyone else reminded of Anita Bryant, albeit that she actually did win best-in-show? Arf arf.

Posted by: AFVeteran1 | April 22, 2009 4:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Well done, but I doubt it will get through

Interesting to examine PWAA's obsessions here. And really it seems quite common among the American pushers of Shari'a Law.

Most of us straights who support our fellow Americans' having the same rights as we enjoy are not obsessionally consumed with pictures in our heads of what our neighbors are doing in their bedrooms. But here...

"...supporting men screwing each other up the rear is normal"

you see on display the fascination for the conservatives. It is all about the sex act for them.

When I think about this issue, I'm thinking about the gay couples I have seen or known - in public - not in their bedrooms. I just see a loving couple, who apparently want to make a life together. I don't even NEED to know what they do in the bedroom. But for a conservative, it's another game entirely. It's about the up-close and personal details of their sex acts. It's pretty clear to me, and I think others, that you people have sexual issues that you need to work out. I sincerely wish you the best of luck with that. I hope someone professional helps you. You definitely seem to have some things to talk about there.

As for Old Testament vs New Testament, I bring up the old because that's where 99% of the gay-bashing scripture is, and it's what the English-speaking Taliban (sorry, but there's little better way to describe them) base their judgment on.

For you, perhaps it's something slightly different. It's about the sex. You're really hung up on that, aren't you? I wonder why, but clearly there is a very personal fascination on your part.

"It's pretty clear to me, and I think others, that you people have sexual issues that you need to work out. I sincerely wish you the best of luck with that. I hope someone professional helps you. You definitely seem to have some things to talk about there."

This is the white flag of gays, when they are beat on the facts they pull this out invariably. Thanks for playing come back anytime.......

And on this world we have two genders ( MALE & FEMALE ) in the animal kingdom
-------
Um, not entirely. There are many species that carry gonads and gametes of both sexes, and a few that change from one to the other naturally as part of the life cycle. So your argument is a false one, as well as being irrelevant here.

Marriage has ALWAYS been between a MAN and a WOMAN all over the world.
---------
Also no. We all know about polygamy, rendering your choice of pronouns false. As for the man-woman thing, I suggest you and everyone else here read The Marriage of Likeness: Same-Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe by John Boswell, Ph.D. Marriage isn't so much a sacred rite as a property transaction. And certainly not required for procreation, which seems to be the basis for the argument advanced by the Christotaliban ("Marriage exists for the purpose of procreation").

Its a sad day when comments like Mr Perez's aren't considering out-of-bounds. Liking or disliking ones OPINION is fair. Would should openly debate such high profile issues, but we should debate them with a civil tongue. Not down in the gutter like animals spitting on each other.

I'm certain Mr P's sexuality leaves him off limits for denouncing his remarks....if one did you will be labled a racist or homophobe. His gutter vile langauge disgust me and today's youth and urban music glorify such filth. What a sad day indeed.

Imagine the question being about inter-racial marriages, or inter-religion marriages?

Had she said that she would never want to marry a women but it's a free country and different folks have different strokes, she would be Miss America right now. It's supporting a narrow religious view on non-believers that's the problem.

There are some religions that would burn her at the stake for showing herself in public in a bikini. Where's the Christian outrage?

The question asked Miss California was about her opinion. These types of questions (political opinions) really have no place in determining the outcome of beauty pagents. It seems that there is no escape from people who are trying to advance there personal political beliefs. Its truly sad the direction which this country is going. In order for this to be a great nation it needs people who have principles and the conviction to stand by them. Not people who let others intimidate them into not expressing what they feel. Miss California should be appluaded. As for Perez Hilton his true colors shined through in the video he posted on youtube.

Miss California personal beliefs have shined a bright light on what’s right about America and what’s wrong with the Miss America Contest. What if the crown was on the other foot and Perez Hilton was asked by John Wayne of American-Cow-Girl-Contest, if Hilton supports tradition marriage. Perez Hilton should be dethrone and sent back to the School-of-Decency, there Hilton could learn that principles still apply contrary to your individual beliefs. The question was asked and the truth was spoken, how can that be wrong?

Don't feel badly that you lost the crown, Miss Prejean. Just remember, Vanessa Williams was far more successful as a controversial ex-Miss America than she ever would have been if she had quietly served out her reign. Although her "crime" was of a different nature than yours...

I am not a Christian. I am not a follower of any religion for that matter. However I do feel marriage is between a man and a woman. This is how it has worked for our human species and this is why our species suvives to present time.
Having said that, I have no problem with what people do behind their doors, homosexuals, heteroseuals .... we all have our freedom to choose. However please remember we owe our very existence to the union of a man and a woman. With today's technologiges, one can bear children with some strangers' donated eggs or sperms. If we rely on this, I don't know what I could say about the species I belong to.

B2O2, then you haven't met any true Christians; only actors. Once anyone grasps a full understanding of what it means to be a Christian, their life will change forever. So, I ask you this, "What does it mean when Jesus said many will be hated for His names sake?" From my own observation, we may not be stoning folks but I do see a lot of the latter going on lately.

PWAA, thanks, and I agree.

Ok, I agree that Perez Hilton was out of bounds with his insults. Prejean expressed her (admittedly ignorant) opinion and she is entitled to it. However, she should have lost if for nothing else than that her answer was not in the least bit articulate ("opposite marriage"?!). Part of being a spokesperson/public speaker is the ability to think on your feet and be articulate--she failed at this and should have lost regardless of her opinions. For example, she could have said something like, "marriage law has traditionally been left to the states, and I therefore think that this is an issue best left to the democratic process of each individual state." Or, "I personally believe that marriage is a religious institution that should be between a man and a woman, but that gays should be allowed to enter into legal unions with all of the same rights and benefits as married couples." She couldn't come up with a coherent answer therefore she deserved to lose.

It's just too bad that she now has to milk this, thereby taking the spotlight away from the winner of the competition.

Finally, Hilton is not helping his cause with his vitriol. In fact, he's helping Prejean cast herself as a martyr for the Christian Right. He should just shut his mouth and go back to doing what he does best, which is drawing penises on pictures.

Has anyone considered that the public is not privy to all of the facts? Miss CA could have won 2nd place on her own merit, sans any political speculation on the part of the grand poobah pundits.

PWAA - thanks for posting that whole scripture, the entirety of which I was citing by reference in my original post. I actually posted exactly what you did on another thread here (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/04/gays_bashing.html) but didn't want to be spamming by doing it again.

And now, could you please give us all some creative alternative meaning for the final verse in that section? It states:

"And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear."

Is it metaphorical, perhaps? Does it mean "shower your errant son with Rolling Stones concert tickets" maybe? Please help yourself out of this mess here, because it sure looks like the Bible is commanding the death penalty for slothful, disobedient teenagers (to be generous, I'll assume there wasn't an epidemic of alcoholism among toddlers or pre-teens during the time of the Great Wise Ones).

And *I* fully understand the difference between Old and New Testament. Jesus came upon the scene to (basically) inform his flock that what really mattered was how we treated each other, and that seeing your own flaws was more important than seeing those of others (among many other admirable teachings which most conservatives loathe, like helping the poor and sick and making peace - but I digress).

My whole point here however is that YOUR disapproval of homosexuality IS Old Testament-based. So you are condemning, marginalizing, the very section of the Bible that is the basis for your prejudice.

Again, help yourself out here because it really appears you've put yourself in a heck of a fix. You too, Veteran. Maybe you can help PWAA out.

Miss California's beliefs, whether pro or anti-gay are not my concern. That she has more power over my life at the voting booth most certainly is my concern. Civil rights issues have no place at the voting booth and everyone knows this, that is why the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed by Congress over-riding legalized state sanctioned bigotry and hatred. Miss California obviously "was beget" through a small gene-pool and has an even smaller brain.

Might I introduce a neologism?

Homosharia - Totalitarian control where one can't get a job or even win a beauty contest if one doesn't buy into the homosexual agenda.

Congress is moving forward with "hate" speech which would have sent Miss Prejean up the river.

The homosexual agendites continue to spit on our democratic freedoms. The "tolerant" left will tolerate no variance from the party line.

Mr "Hilton" apologized for calling her a "dumb b&tch" then retracted his apology and said, instead of the "B" word, he was thinking of the "c" word.

I truly am thankful to Mr. Hilton for exposing the hatefulness of the homosexualists. What is more embarrassing then his behavior, is people defending his behavior.

From the Right's view: This is a business. They can hire who ever they want. So she had the right to say so and the judge had to judge. Private business. Govt not involved here. So there is no issue.

Unfortunately she did not grow up with values which teach that public nudity(even partial, in a bikini) for gaining some fame/money is a sin. Remember Adam and Eve story. Genesis 3:16

But there is another more important question, Does the god she believes in so incompetent that he could not make a world where even Ted Haggard (former head of 30million) was immune from gay behavior.

Of course the less is incompetent to speak against Islamic radicalism, no free speech here, PC plagues it. The unholy alliance.

Animal, insects, and micro-organizms have much smaller brains than humans! Why don't they choose to be gay and end there specices? Being gay is a sickness, not a rational choice!
It is confusing to our children when gay couples are before them.
I really thought humans are smarter than animals...but I guess the gay communtity is dumber than animals, insects and micro-organizms

Geez, the liberals love to whine. This woman stated her opinion, which she is free to do. Get over it.

Question: If Mr. Hilton asked a different contestant the same question, and the answer was a whole-hearted gushing endorsement of gay marriage, would a conservative judge down the table be justified in giving her a low score and costing her the competition just because he disagreed with her view?

See, Perez, how the shoe fits when it's on the other foot? Tell me, in a land where Tolerance is quickly becoming the national religion, which is more intolerant....a pageant contestant expressing a view not supportive of gay marriage, or a hateful, vengeful, full-of-bitterness judge of said competition giving her a low score just because he hated her answer?

Seems to me the real hate and intolerance here came from the idiot at the judge's table.

And a BIG: "WHO CARES?" This is from a beauty contestant in a beauty contest. How much more inconsequential could either the participant, or the venue be? Neither of them have the power to make a difference on anything except the contestants' lives. Beauty contests are an anachronism, no matter how the advocates try to gloss it up as some great "scholarship" opportunity. It is soft-core porn for a bunch of hypocritical voyeurs, and exploitive.

It's not a religious issue. It's a civil rights issue. The Bible was used to justify slavery and then segregation. Anyone want to defend either of those now?

Sure, she's free to speak her mind about her beliefs just as anyone else is. But, in turn, other people are free to speak their minds about her opinion.

Of course the left is incompetent to speak against Islamic radicalism, no free speech here, PC plagues it. The unholy alliance.

I'm much more offended by the notion that Mr. Perez somehow speaks for me. I don't recall voting for him to represent me, and I have no (legal) power to shut him up.

Yet somehow, everytime some gay guy acts like an idiot, dozens of other idiots start claiming that I, personally, am shoving my views down their collective throats.

Mr. Hilton: please be aware that your antics won't just be used to judge YOU, they'll also be used to judge ME.

Ms. Prejean: The first part of your answer was ill-informed (I don't have this choice you speak of) and the second part was a little patronizing (it happens to be my country too).

Mr. Hilton AND Ms. Prejean: There are more graceful (ie tactful) ways to present both of your respective views. Please look up "tact" in the dictionary BEFORE trying to speak for an entire group of people.

Susan Boyle has more talent. Nothing like a Christian beauty pageant. Brings out the lions.

"Perez Hilton, the gay community, and close to half of America is being hypocritical. They can have their thoughts and beliefs on gay marriage but anyone who disagrees with them cannot? I thought we were "lucky to live in a land that we can choose"...what religion to practice, who and what to vote for, etc.

Does this not outrage anyone else? "

I understand your point, and I agree with you...to an extent. I believe we should be free to make our own choices as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.

I do NOT believe we should have a choice to treat others as being worth less than the rest of us based on their sex, race, religion, sexual preference etc. I think it is wrong to say, "Because so and so likes men instead of women, I choose to take away some of his rights."

We lose nothing by treating them as equals - how would your day to day life change if tomorrow men were allowed to marry other men?

The woman flubbed the answer. It started out as non-sense gibberish; then she rescued it by giving the stock answwer "...she believes marriage should be between a man and a woman... yada-yada-yada..."

The jusge who asked the question was gay. She gave an answer that was offensive to him. He opted to vote for another contestant as the winner.

This is not really a question of "freedom of speech." All the gay-bashing homophobes need to get over that. It is a question of using your common sense in throwing out offensive remarks, to whom you address yourself, and when.

If you want to win the pageant, don't offend the judge. Even Archie Bunker would know that. She is probably used to preferential treatment in all things because of her looks, so she may not have much common sense about these things.

So, it is a lesson learned.

To MGRB: Your comments are threatening, bigoted, ill informed and a waste of my reading time. Please go tell it to Pat Buchanan.

I have yet to understand how two people of the same sex getting married diminishes heterosexual marriage in any way. So I think people who oppose same sex marriage, citing the bible, display an inability to distinguish ancient beliefs in the bible from current day rational human behavior. On the other hand I don't think that opposing same-sex marriage has become a disqualifier in any particular human endeavor outside of one's personal political view.If the fundamentalist Christians feel they need a martyr that badly then they are in worse shape then I thought. I hope the young woman in question is allowed to pursue her goals in the future with all the dignity that she herself brought to the contest.

no comment until I see her butt naked.

For those eyes that have not seen:

From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, gay sexual activity is still mutual masturbation caused by one or more complex sexual defects. Some defects are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell. Of course not all having these abnormal tendencies, show it outwardly as alluded to in the following synopsis:

"Biology and sexual orientation is research into possible biological influences on the development of human sexual orientation. No simple cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated, and there is no scientific consensus as to whether the contributing factors are primarily biological or environmental. Many think both play complex roles.[1][2] The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association have both stated that sexual orientation probably has multiple causes.[3][4] Research has identified several biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual orientation. These include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure. Conclusive proof of a biological cause of sexual orientation would have significant political and cultural implications. [5]"

References are available on Wikipedia.

PWAA - YOU were the one who first brought up the graphic details of gay sex, not me. And I've noticed it is almost always thus in discussions of the issue. It's just interesting that it's always the anti-gay-marriage crowd who is fascinated with the mechanics of their sex act, while the rest of us are more concerned with their hearts and lives.

So I ask: why is it that you all are laser-focussed on the base details of the sex act, yet somehow WE are the ones who have lost touch with the spiritual question at hand? Just food for thought, though I suspect you don't want to go there.

AFVeteran1 - I'm so glad you recognize that there are pseudochristians running around this country that are still stuck in the Old Testament. I take it from your comment that you do not count yourself as one of them. Do you agree then that there is scant evidence in the New Testament that Jesus Christ - the supposed foundation of your religion - cared a whit about who and how someone loved, just that he did so with a full and forgiving heart?

Be careful when you assume that non-believers no little about your central document, by the way. Just because we haven't swallowed it as being divinely handed down (like Joseph Smith's plates, or Muhammed's books, or the Bahgivad Gita, or any other similarly-held document) doesn't mean we haven't read them.

She lost because she thought that Vermont was another country. She would have lost my vote too with, "Well in my country ....

ODSSGONZALES

Animals also indulge in gay behavior. See wikipedia for thousands of such species.

Anyway the species does not go extinct till everyone is gay. When it is a small percentage there is no risk of extinction.

Risk of extinction is more from wars(I am not anti-war) than from homosexuality.

Islamic extremism threatens the world more than homosexuality.

"So which offends you more, America?

Prejean's comments? The likelihood that her views cost her the pageant crown? Or the fact that so many people seem to care so much about a beauty pageant contestant's response to a celebrity blogger's question on a TV show?"
===============

As an agnostic let me say, what offends me most is that America's Politically Correct are rapidly becoming America's Thought Police. Pretty much the atheistic version of church-sponsored censorship that so many used to feel was such a danger. And they seem to be finding a great deal of support from Mainstream American Media as well as local, state and federal government.

Welcome to the United Police States of America... please be sure to submit all thoughts to the Thought Police for verification and sanitation before speaking... and if you're hiding Ibuprofen in your panties please step back from the counter and wait for the appropriate authorities. You'll know them by their masks, jackboots and M16s...

I substituted the words “same-sex”, with the word “black”. Tell me how you feel after reading it. If it’s not personal enough, substitute the word “same-sex”, with the word “women” (who also have struggled in the past). Now; if it offends anyone, then you know how homosexuals feel (see below).
----------------------------------
"We live in a land that you can choose to be black or not black. And you know what in my country, in my family I think that I believe that blacks should be white. No offense to anybody there, but that's how I was raised and that's how I think it should be, white only.”

My disapproval is nowhere near Old Testament based. That's your opinion and that's fine. However, my disapproval IS life based, scientifically based, disease based, naturally based and any other common sense basis that applies. Since we're being blunt here, the perversion of sex does not deserve rights. If male on male or female on female is something that you're into, personally I can't do anything about it. But, I should be able to voice my opinion that I don't want to see the crap all over my television screen, at the movie theater, in children's books, or made to seem normal in any other way when it's not. I watched Mr. Hilton on Larry King and his comparison of homosexual rights to that of civil rights is rather pathetic because racial issues are a subject much different than male on male sodomy. It is a fact that homosexual men account for 53% of AIDS in the U.S. and the rest are African Americans and women. Homosexuality plays a part in the other half as well because a significant number of those categorize themselves as bi-curious or bi-sexual. The numbers speak for themselves and the last time I checked AIDS is still an epidemic. The hilarious part about it is that quacks such as Bill Maher and Perez Hilton try to make an argument that it is Christians that have a psychological defect. Hmmm.

It would be quite easy to tell whether she lost because of her comments. Look at the scoring of all the judges after the interview. Did perez hilton score affect Miss California enought for her to lose. We won't know because I doubt they would realize the voting. But a good inference is that it did effect the outcome which is bad.

Would it be hateful speech to say you don't approve of polyamous marriage?

I'm more offended by the fact that we still have a MISS USA contest in this country.

What's offensive to me is her just assuming it's the reason why she lost. How arrogant. She would have made a lousy Miss USA.

1. She is beauty pageant contestant, not a political representative. She should have answered the question honestly, according to what she really thinks, not according to how most people in California think.

2. Even feigning that this is a scholarship contest is absurd. I'll believe that when they crown an ugly Miss USA or Miss America. Never in a million years. It's a beauty contest. Always has been. Always will be.

3. Hilton is nothing more than a failed actor who has no talent and a big mouth. If he wasn't gay, he wouldn't be famous. So he can just shut up about how bad it is to be gay in this country. He's like Ed McMahon - one of those people who pops up everywhere but who everybody wonders, "What does he DO, exactly?"

4. Hilton is a liar when he says her answer didn't cost her the crown. Let's see the score sheets, buddy. It had nothing to do with whether her answer was lucid, or grammatically proper. She said something that rankled the judges on a personal level, and on a personal level, they knocked her out of there. That's what I believe happened, and it's unfair.

5. Speaking of lousy answers, Miss NC's answer to whether taxpayer money should be used to bail out big corporations ("no") was the WORST possible answer and was completely irresponsible. So much for "representing the people." See how "the people" do when a large gamut of corporations fold without that assistance. When she tours the country and shakes hands with the millions of unemployed, I hope she remembers that her view would have made it way worse for her fellow Americans.

6. As for Miss CA offending "50% of Americans" which people keep parroting... don't believe it. What people say when they are polled, and what they really believe in their heart, are two different things. I think way more than 50% of Americans wish no ill will toward gays, don't want to see them attacked, or kept out of schools or jobs, etc. But if two gay guys married and took up residence next door, those same open-minded people would cringe at having to see two guys snuggling and kissing and holding hands in the yard next door while they are outside having a barbecue with their friends. Or how about at your school's prom, where your kids go? Go ahead, folks. Search your soul. Ask yourself if you TRULY wouldn't mind having to live with that in your face every day. It's one thing to say "those gays, way over THERE, can do anything they want." It's quite another to really believe it and be willing to accept it in your own back yard.

The notion that 50% of this country really truly accepts gays and gay marriage as equal to straight relationships is total bunk.

Dear AFVeteran1: I know it's not just the Christians who are delusional. I know that anyone who "believes" in something that has basis in scientific fact,no proof, and that requires "faith" to be "real" is just a delusion. So, that said, logically, all followers of any "faith" are delusional and should not have a voice how I live my life, legal or otherwise. That is why the founders of this country wrote our Constitution to keep the law out of faith and vice versa. Folks need to get a Constitutional education before speaking on this subject.

How is it in todays world,where we are in a fight terrorist.We can elect a man to be our president who has terrorist ties,and could not even pass a background check to work for the F.B.I,But we couldn't elect a Miss America because she didn't approve of homosexual marriage.

AFVETERAN1

Your points, you say are commonsense based. I agree that homosexuality increases AIDS cases. You argue that "hence we should not approve of HS and no rights for gays".

Apparently lung cancer kills more people, both first and second hand(non-consenting victims) smokers. I agree with you as soon as smokers lose their rights to smoke even by themselves, because it kills more people(first hand, assume no second hand victims) than HS.

Apparently, when you ban a lot of things you get close to Taliban. Freedom (including speech) is the hallmark of the West and it should remain so.

However I do not want to seem that I defend Hilton.

Things I find offensive:

1. Perez Hilton. His entire success story is built on gossip about others.
2. Miss USA pageants, and all beauty pageants, which celebrate excellence in makeup and cosmetic surgery and the lowest common denominator in everything else. Yes, Miss California's answer was a dumb ramble. Were you expecting Stephen Hawking?
3. Legal discrimination based solely on unproven supernatural beliefs.

AFVETERAN1, thank you for joining PWAA in admitting that it is all about the sexual act for you. To this moment I have not even addressed the sexual act, except to note that both of you are rather fixated on it. I submit that you are both opposed to men marrying men (and women marrying women) fundamentally because their form of sex disgusts you. That comes first, I believe, and then you have constructed a Potemkin Village of rationales - even invoking science (something conservatives generally mistrust and fear, so I appreciate how deeply you must feel about this to have drawn in the Devil on your behalf).

We could go all day back and forth about the science here. I could cite all the complications a woman can get into - up to and including death - as a result of becoming pregnant and insist therefore (as an example of the nonsense of such an argument) that that proved that heterosexual sex was unnatural and a "disease-ridden act".

But it's not really about reason for you all, I don't think. You have an emotional aversion to the way these people interact in bed, and you need to rationalize it. That's really it, is it not?

Me, I have aversions too. I hate beets. Liver also. The thought of eating either makes me want to wretch, frankly. As a mature member of a free society, I am presented with two alternative ways to deal with my aversion:

1. Commit myself to finding and banding together with like-minded citizens who find the idea of beet-eating or liver-eating repulsive. Lobby, and work tirelessly to BAN THESE ABOMINABLE FOODS. Insist that people who WANT to eat these foods are immoral, defective, and just wrongheaded.

2. Just don't eat the stuff.

Would it really be that far beyond your manhood (assuming you're male, I really don't know) to suck it up, live and let live, and try the second route?

Ms. California is an airhead and a dingbat, and badly misinformed about the laws of "her country." I was embarassed for her just because she was so profoundly inarticulate. She should have lost the crown for that alone. Factor in that she is a bigot, and I feel no sympathy whatsoever for her. Like most religious airheads, she is incapable of separating religious beliefs from the secular laws that govern our multi-cultural land. She didn't just lose a crown, she came off as a buffoon. Who would hire a woman like that, other than a man looking for a mistress? Biblically correct? While parading around in a bikini? Give me a break. She's a moron. As for Perez Hilton, he's a blogger. It's his job to be inflamatory!! Same for Rush and his asinine cronies. Chastizing Perez Hilton for being over the top is absurd. That's what he is and that's what he does. Of course, there's no rule that says you have read his posts, is there?

I did not watch the pageant but I have read the comments that Miss California said and, while I vigorously disagree with her view point, I do feel that she answered the question graciously. I think that PErez Hilton's comments were somewhat over the top as he is himself but, like Miss California, he has the right to express his view point.

What I will not abide is those Conservatives who jumped on this as some kind of Liberal and gay discrimination and refusal to accept opposing viewpoints. That may well be true of many but even if it were true of the majority of gays and/or Liberals their intolerance does not come close to the intolerance of almost any Conservatives.

Way before this Conservatives opposed the Voting Rights Act as well as most of the Civil Rights movement. And today, even while someone like Hilton rants and raves about a contenstants comments , NO Liberal and/or gay person suggests taking away the rights of Christians to preach or marry or indulge in their lifestyle. No gay and/or Liberal thinks that religious peopple be denied to worship any way they chose at their own churches. Can this be said of Conservatives?

Even a gracious and supposedly innocuous answer like that of Miss California's inherently denies the equal rights due all Americans but denied to gays - the right to marry and to enjoy all the financial and other rewards of marraige.

Hilton may have been out of line but most religious Conservatives have been out of line for decades.

STOP LYING.

Personally I believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder, not a right. Arsonists like setting fires, should we allow them to have the right to burn buildings. Kleptomaniacs like to steal, does this mean that laws prohibiting theft infringe upon their rights. Beastiality hurts no one except the animal, should it be legal. To these questions the answer, of course, is a resounding NO. Some things are so obvious that there should be no need for any law, and no need to debate the subject. Mental illness should be treated, not encouraged. I urge all homosexuals to get some real theraputic help, you need it.

Now if 12 people start hearing voices we call that a mental ward and give them treatment but back 2000 years ago, they wrote down what they said and made a religion out of it, not a source of confidence, and certainly not a good basis for denying equal rights. To quote a great man " do unto others as you would have them do unto you" . Now that sounds like a nice Christian saying that we could all do better at.

Dear JIMMF: "This is typical liberal fascism." The definition of Fascism is: a person who is dictatorial or has extreme right-wing views (from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascist). Obviously, you are illiterate as well as bigoted. From your short rant I can deduce that; a)You group folks into liberals/conservatives b) Religious/Heathen and c) Straight/Gay. Get a clue. Most people are somewhere along the spectrum of these opposites. Logical, thinking adults would agree that everyone should have equal rights and this would include marriage equality.

B2O2

I admire your comment. Good reasoning. I did not think of that before.

HILTON HAS REACTED IN A BIGOTED AND INTOLERANT WAY. IT’S NO WONDER THAT OVER 95% OF THE COMMENTS POSTED HERE ARE NEGATIVE TOWARDS HIM. IF HE IS A SPOKESPERSON FOR THE HOMOSEXUAL COMMUNITY, THEY DON’T NEED ANY OPPONENTS. MY QUESTION IS: WHERE IS THE CONDEMNATION OF HIS DESPICABLE RHETORIC FROM THE OFFICIALS OF THE USA PAGAENT? IF THEY ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH HIM, NEXT YEAR THEY SHOULD RENAME IT THE MISS HOMOSEXUAL USA PAGAENT.

I am also deeply amused by the "safety in numnbers" belief of the bigots out there who feel that because the majority of Americans don't support gay marriage, they are right. Back in 1950 the majority of Americans didn't support civil rights, the right of women to earn equal pay for equal work or the right of people of difference races to marry. The majority of American were biggoted and stupid then, and they are biggoted and stupid now. When you talk about this majority of Americans, are you talking about the same majority who believe in evolution as science and seriously believe as physical fact that a snake can talk and a woman can pop out of a man's side? Is that the majority we're talking about? Yeah, stellar thinkers all.

How funny! A judge who asks questions not to get an honest opinion but to elicit a politically correct answer goes ballistic and negative when the answer doesn't suit. Honesty makes a hero of the contestant while intolerance and foul language show the judge to be an unprofessional twit.

And all in something that's all fluff anyway.

B2O2:

A couple things....

I'm an accountant not a theologian, but your contention that Biblical teaching against homosexuality is only in the Old Testament is simply wrong. There are many similar teachings by Paul and elsewhere in the New Testament. Start with a read of Romans 1. I understand if people just don't like the Bible, don't believe in it, think it's just a collection of fairy tales....but no one can embrace the Bible and simultaneously proclaim that Jesus taught - anywhere - that homosexuality is ok.

I will offer that I find the denouncing of homosexuality and simultaneous near-ignoring of heterosexual adultery incompatible for those who claim Biblical views, as I believe the Bible speaks against both equally and does not single out homosexuality as some greater form of sin than any other form of immorality. But to say that only the Old Testament teaches against homosexually and that Jesus brought a different message via the New Testament is simply uninformed.

Your other contention that 'conservatives loathe helping the poor and sick' is also severely misguided. Check out any study on charitable giving. Conservatives give far more of both time and money to charities, and not just to their churches.

What conservatives "loathe" is government control of everything. I would much rather continue financially supporting our local church-run health clinic that takes care of the sick and poor, as opposed to having that money we are giving them taken from us via higher taxes and given to a faceless bureaucracy in Washington that thinks it knows how to spend the money better. (And if you think government-controlled entities would at least be better and more efficient, I have two words for you: Fannie Mae).

I think we can agree that conservatives and liberals certainly have different opinions as to how the "poor and sick" can best be helped, but to pretend liberals are somehow more compassionate simply because they are more willing to tax-and-spend other peoples money is fairly arrogant.

Dear Mike92: Homosexuality is not an illness, unless you want to agree that heterosexuality is an illness as well. It is well documented that all forms of life live along the sprectrum from gay to straight and everything in between. I hope you do not ever have children to whom you pass along your ignorant beliefs. Please see the APA's website and educate yourself on your fellow humans' sexuality (http://www.psychologymatters.org/hooker.html)

The gays and lesbians could have the SAME rights granted to them but the militants want to change the definition of marriage to be able to sue religious organizations and other organizations that they want to disrupt. Some months ago some of these militant members went into California church and disrupted the service and through pamphlets. You see what's coming down, It's NOT about rights at all.
If you're keeping score,
Prejean 100
Hilton 0

If people have good arguments against gay marriage and express them clearly, fine. Miss California: bad argument and confused presentation.
A. She's against gay marriage because that's (her interpretation of) god's law and that's the way she was raised.
Lots of South Africans were raised to believe that interracial marriage was against god's law. Want a bigot like that as Miss America in the public eye. You cannot use "god's law" and "that's the way I was raised" to deny a person basic rights.
B. She thinks it's great we live in a free country - but is against gays having the freedom to wed their loved one... And I am supposed to understand that?

The problem is that there are no clear principles on which to deny consenting adult gay couples the right to marry. There are religious ptinciples in certain religious groups - but I'm a church-going Christian and proud to say that my church supports and performs gay wedding-ceremonies (I live in Canada at the moment).
What really scares me are people who equate allowing a consensual, balanced, and loving relationship between two adults who happen to have the same gender, with opening the door to pederasty or polygamy. That's desperate, and desperately wrong.

What a freak show. Look at all you people sticking your agenda into the mouths of this christian freak and this gay freak.

It's a Freak Show, and you've become part of it.

Is anyone moderating these posts??????

Holy Cow! What's the problem here?

It seems that the extremists on both sides have come out with their knives pre-sharpened. Miss Prejean (we share a name, not beliefs) clearly stated her beliefs in answer to a question. Now, I don't agree with her, but she was asked a question. Should she refuse to answer (take the Pageant 5th?), should she lie about her beliefs, or should she give the typical non-answer more prevalent in these events? She did none of the above. She answered a question. So, my friends on the left, simmer down. We disagree with her, but she's not on the Supreme Court, so her opinions have no effect on you or me.

As to the right-wingers, who seem to have a ready made excuse for her finishing in second place, "your victim-hood is showing". She competed, she finished second (out of 50 or 51, I'm thinking), and she'll get some lovely parting gifts. She's no Rosa Parks, she's just a college student who finished second in a beauty pageant.

No one in America will remember the winner of this contest in about six months, so I would urge everyone with drool on their chin (both left and right) to move along, not. Nothing to see here.

This clown would have known what her views were just by reviewing her CV. He chose his question to get his 15 minutes in the spotlight at a more elevated level.

Why anyone cares what he does or thinks is beyond me.

Beauty contests should go the way of the dinosaur anyhow if this is the best they can do for "judges."

"Conservatives give far more of both time and money to charities, and not just to their churches." By DBW1.

Do you think they do that out of altruism. They do it precisely to propagate their creed of Xians, probably also guarantees them a seat in heaven, like the 72 houris story of Islam.

Look at what the religious conservatives are doing to cultures across the world. They use their money (i.e. power) to proselytize. Indigenous cultures (come are violent but not more than Xianity has been) are being crushed by their monetary might.

There is competition between Xians and Muslims to persecute and convert the polytheists. What right do they have to do so? How are they so sure hat there is only one god?

If they discarded the remaining gods they might as well discard the last standing one.

No group is more intolerant than gays. They won't be satisfied until our next president is a lesbian with a female wife/husband. Those opposed to their excessive demands require courage and fortitude. Don't fall for the gay agenda. They deserve civil rights and no more.

Dear EKIM53: Your comments are outright lies. Please see: http://www.equalitygiving.org/files/Blueprint-for-LGBT-Equality/Equality%20%20Religious%20Freedom%20Act%20-%20March%2021%202009.pdf for an eye opener. A new proposal by the politically active gays "The Equality and Religious Freedom Act". We DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOUR RELIGIOUS BULL****. We want our civil legal rights. Do whatever you want in your church, I don't care.

The christians are more intolerant than the gays. The gays can be just as loud, pushy, obnoxious, demanding, and self-righteous, but the one they never do is demand that you be gay too.

Can't say that for the christians.

I've personally enjoyed all the hate in most of these posting. I do a few questions though.

If the question was instead about a interracial marriages, and she responded with the same intolerance, how would everyone feel?

I noticed that most of the responders that were critical of Hilton's words typically stated that she has free speech, the same as he does, so how dare he criticize her opinion. Is it just me or is that kinda odd?

Pertaining to the free speech aspect, he wasn't having her arrested for hate speak. He judged her as a Miss USA contestant and felt that someone with such intolerant opinions would not make a good spokesman for the US, since we are a country of freedoms. But based on the responses I have seen here, maybe that would make her a great spokesman for this country.

One last note, by saying she wanted to be "biblically correct" prove that the view of a marriage being between and man and a woman is a religious matter?

If this this country were a theocracy, then being "biblically correct" would be important but since this is a free country you a free to believe and do what you want. That includes hating gay marriage, as well as being able to have a gay marriage.

There is so much more that I want to say but my head is hurting from all the hate I have seen today, so I'm done.

miss california represents the state and its people which just recently had a vote on this very issue prop 8 and with a clear and over whelming majority rejected same sex marriage with an simple and clear NO!.
CARRIE PREJEAN WAS SIMPLY articulating the very views held by the people of the state she represents.
which i may add reached its choice by the very DEMOCRATIC PROCESS that this great nation is built upon.
homosexuality has been and always will be the fringe element of every culture as we saw on the show the homosexual judge attempted to HI-JACK and SUBVERT a straight heterosexual beauty contest into a homosexual political platform.
which is what homosexuals continually have done though out history.
subvert hijack distort family oriented culture.
in and of it self homosexual behavior is nothing more and UTTERLY EPHEMERAL and an EMPTY ACT an imitation of a procreative act yet only a primitive immature act of a transitory nature with no meaning or purpose.

Christian Agenda + Gay Agenda = 0

If only bad attitudes reacted like matter and antimatter, we could get rid of all you self-righteous blowhards.

JUDGEALAN
"miss california represents the state and its people which just recently had a vote on this very issue prop 8 and with a clear and over whelming majority rejected same sex marriage with an simple and clear NO!."
-----------

You call 53-47 an overwhelming majority?

The question is where do we draw the line.
To be penalized for answering honestly based on your principles slams the door in the face of all those who aspire to stand on what they believe.

The position of the judge on a pageant is to be objective, not blinded by personal agenda!
Having said that, if the topic of discussion is tolerance, then we must truly and genuinely extend this spirit of tolerance across the board.

Instead we have the pendulum swung where the victim is now the new abuser! This level of perverted vitriol coming from the left is counterproductive in the long run.

http://www.radiantdaggers.com/

Me, as a Proud, American Gay Man, Respect her for Her belief's. This is how she and some other people feel.
God gave us Free Will, to think as we Believe/Feel. I however Do Not Agree with her answer.
Do some people feel that we, The Gay Community, a threat to them?
Are they afriad that we will take their partner's, some of them are being taken away without The Gay Community.
The God that I serve would want us to love whom we feel, regardless of their Faith, Color, or Sex
Did God or Jesus, ever say that we should not Love/Marry someone because of their Sex, Faith, or Color?

I don't think she answered the question she was asked.

She was asked whether the other 46 States should have same sex marriage, and why.

The first half of her answer leads you to believe that the other states should adopt same sex marriage laws and the second half of her answer leads you to believe they shouldn't.

Normally, I would expect that not answering a question clearly is bad, but maybe for Miss USA that's a good thing.

Why do we have the Miss USA pageant anyway?

Sure, she is allowed to have her own belief system as is anyone who chooses their beliefs by their religion of choosing, a choice protected by our country. There was a better way to word this however that wouldn't have ticked so many people off.

"I believe that the word marriage is religious in basis, and so following my religious beliefs I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman." If she really wanted to go for broke (although I do not believe she is this open minded) she could have added that "on a state level it should not be "marriage" but a type of civil union that is equal whether the couple is male/female or same gender."

So, when it comes down to it- it's not that she isn't allowed to have her beliefs, of course she is- this IS America, it's that she expressed them in a poorly worded barely literate/confused way. It frazzled her. It shouldn't have, people should be prepared for those types of questions. For losing her composure she should have lost the crown. (imo she should have lost it when she said "opposite marriage" because that's just silly.)

Also, gay people are not perverts. Clearly no one has corrected you on that point, CIAP, and there is no place for that type of wording.

PKKMRES:
"You call 53-47 an overwhelming majority?"

Umm, yes. Obama beat McCain by the same percentages and we've all been told what a sweeping landslide victory for change it was.

As a separate comment ...

"Conservative evangelicals seem ready to nominate Prejean for martyrdom. "The backlash to Prejean's commonsense comments demonstrates the naked intolerance of the militant homosexual movement . . . "

That seems to be the in vogue cliche these days among evangelicals "naked intolerance of the militant homosexual movement." ....

Is that similar to when they hang a gay man on barbed wire in Wyoming to die?

Miss Prejean said she thinks people should be able to do what they want to do, but she personally believe marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman.

Perez Hilton didn't like her answer, gave her a bad score simply because he didn't like her opinion (not because she gave a Miss Teen South Carolina rambling answer), went on a rant calling her a b*** and c***....

I'm sorry, I'm confused again as to who is supposedly the 'intolerant' and hate-filled person in all of this?

DBW1,
"Umm, yes. Obama beat McCain by the same percentages and we've all been told what a sweeping landslide victory for change it was."

I hope you know the difference between "landslide" and "overwhelming majority", besides "landslide victory" of Obama was measured by electoral votes not popular vote.

365-173 looks like landslide(68-32 is more than 2/3rd). 53-47 does not look like overwhelming majority.

I'm offended that you even ask such a dumb question. Organized religion has NO BUSINESS even sticking their long nose into this issue on any level - in any context.

Your spewing of opinions is why Americans and the rest of the world are in fact moving away from organized religion because organized religion sticks it's nose in where it doesn't belong.

Time for you folks to take a LONG snooze and keep out of business that doesn't concern you - EVER.

When Mr. Waters reports on something and then suggests that it's below our notice, he's being inconsistent at best, and a variety of unsavory things at worst.

This non-issue has something for everyone. Personally, I'm offended that in this day and age women are still rated and evaluated like cattle.

I Quote:

"We should care about what a runner up to Miss USA says when it reflects the false and bigoted belief system shared by so many people in this country. Ms. Prejean was simply incorrect when she asserted that we live in a country where we can choose to keep marriage between a man and a woman..."
----------------------------
As a Christian, I do not "hate" those who engage in beastiality, but I do rebuke the sinful nature of the behavior and cry out against this perverse lifestyle being force fed to the American people, our children, and our culture.

It is a lie from the devil when they claim that there are millions of such deviants who support the homosexual lifestyle and homosexual marriages. But that is what they would have us beleive.

The homosexual community pleads for tolerance, but they grant NO tolerance to those who speak out against their pursuit of their own lusts. Homosexuality IS NOT a genetic disorder, but they ask us to believe that it is so. IT IS A CONSCIOUS CHOICE!

As a devout Christian, I love my neighbor, all men, regardless of their chosen lifestyle, but I decry their sin before God, who made us male and female! Now it is becoming incumbent upon all the rest of us to embrace their sickness and call it holy! I shall NEVER agree to that premise!

From this day hence, I will never support, not with my time or money, the Miss California Pageant, nor will any of my friends or family! How truly pathetic that our so called educated leaders and judges have joined in the condemnation of our present and future generations in legitmizing homosexuality.

It is indeed the "seal" that shall surely bring judgement upon this nation by a God who calls this type of behavior an abomination in His sight! It is even more tragic that Hell now enlarges itself to accomodate all those blind souls who shall enter therein because of this abominable lie and blot upon our society!

What is going on? President Obama shake hands and acepts a gift from Hugo and the whole country goes bonkers. A question was asked at a Beauty Padgent... Ms America ...the Young Lady gave an honest thruthful answer and the whole country goes bonkers. What is wrong with you people?
Is Politically Correct gone amok? Or do we want everyone to be Fake?.
If they dont want to give her the crown because they don't like her answer so be it

I have studied all the worlds religions. I have come to the conclusion that for the most part they have had a detrimental impact on human society. Most of the wars and bloodshed throughout history can be laid at the feet of religion. So, I am no fan of the worlds religions. I do have to admit though, that the morality precepts contained in their Holy Writings have had a beneficial impact on organized society. e.g. prohibitions on theft, murder, and adultery are universal. In fact, it is these precepts that are the basis for most civil laws related to morality all over the world.
It is interesting to note that this controversy is couched in terms of Christianity verses atheists and agnostics, whereas if you look at the Sacred Writings of other religions, you find that the Bible is not alone in condemning homosexuality. When you look at the Jewish Torah; the Muslims Quran; Hinduism’s Vedas; the Five Precepts of Buddhism; and the Gurru Granth Sahib of Sikhs, you find they are universal in their condemnation of homosexuality along with their other morality precepts. It is these precepts that were key in formulating the conscience and convictions of most of the worlds inhabitants. Among the precepts contained in these Sacred Writings are tolerance of other's views. It's called the ETHICS OF RECIPROCITY. Examples include "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" "Do not do to others what you would not have others do unto you" "Never impose on others what you would not choose for you" "Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you" It is no wonder then that the comments posted here are running over 95% in favor of Miss California right to express her views and against Hilton's intolerant reaction.
Looking at it objectively, it is clear that the majority do not like the 4% of Americans that are homosexual pursuing their agenda in an way that is intolerant of the convictions of the other 96%. It is time for the homosexual community to stop acting like 2yr olds and grow up. Otherwise, they are going to experience a tremendous backlash.

First, what she said actually did not make sense. In fact we do not "live in a land where you can choose same sex or opposite" with respect to marriage. That was the point of Hilton's question. She then goes on to say that "In my country..." (is this a different country from the one where we do have choice?)"...I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman." Again a non-responsive answer, since no one would question her right to her beliefs, the question asked about the legality of the matter.

There is nothing here that smacks of any First Amendment issues--she was able to say her piece and the government did nothing to stop her. Saying that she lost the award because of her beliefs takes a leap of faith that even she would not be willing to make.

Most importantly, a true christian might heed Christ's word a bit more, namely, they shall know us by our actions. It seems to me that modern evangelism is all talk and no action. And the thought of evangelizing at a beauty contest seems . . . dare I say . . . unchristian.

Dear Jorda48: Please keep your religion to yourself. This is a SECULAR NATION OF LAWS, not a Christian Nation. If you had any education, you would know this and understand that it my duty to point this out to you as a citizen. Please go back to school and study the U.S. Constitution and then come back to me with a rational, logical, critically thought out response that is free of your religious fanaticism.

Bear with me. Read the whole thing.

There's a reason why in every country/culture/religion, a marriage has traditionally taken place in a church/mosque/the religious equivalent thereof. That has very much to do with the fact that marriage since its inception has been sanctioned by religion - pick one - all of them. Not courts and court houses. Its no coincidence that every religion condemns the ACT of homosexuality. Not to be confused with the homosexual. The assertion is made in Christianity for example, that God hates sin, but loves the sinner. Nonetheless the fact is that marriage has its roots in the religions of the world and none of those religions sanction same sex marriages.

This isn't really a problem for homosexuals, because for the most part they don't really sanction the religions that don't sanction them. If my understanding is right, homosexuals are not looking for unions that will be recognized in the context of the religious foundations of a marriage. They are looking for the legal benefits and recognitions that have been traditionally bestowed on marriages. If that's all it is, give it to them. Just don't call it a marriage. The very term is oxymoron.

What I'm trying to wrap my head around is why there's this backlash b/c the poor girl respectfully stated what she believes. And the apparent intolerance on the part of all these homosexuals who are asking for tolerance. Seems a little hypocritical. Didn't the president that the liberals (I believe most homosexuals are liberals) voted in shares her view? Why didn't Perez call him a b*tch or a c*nt? Its not like the contestant called anyone a f*g, or a homo.

"The Gay movement offends me more.
We shouldn't have to accept perversion of Marriage just because the perverts say we should.
Posted by: Ciap | April 22, 2009 3:12 PM "

OMG - How stupid are you - you shouldn't have to "accept" it, therefore, we should deny people their civil rights under the constitution so you aren't offended????

As for Ms California - she didn't lose because of her opinion - she lost because she couldn't put two intelligent words together to form a sentence - DUH!!!!

She has the freedom to say what she said and express her beliefs. And the judges have the same freedom to express their beliefs. Far too often, people confuse freedom of speech with freedom to have your speech accepted and/or respected. Ms. California spoke her mind, and suffered the social consequences of that. No harm, no foul.

Reply to: rbaldwin2

You fail to accept the fact that by openly promoting and flaunting your perversions, gaining legitimacy in the eyes of society, in the eyes of the law, that you will lead many, many of our innocent children into condemnation before the Lord God Jehovah! You bring not only judgement against yourselves but against its' people and this nation!

This defiance against the laws of God even now brings judgement against our economy, our lands, our food supply, and shall surely bring the destruction of this nation!

So enjoy your momentary liberties and your time in the sun, for darkness shall surely overtake you and this land and its' people, for all you have shall be torn from you and you shall be like the chaffe which once was, but is cast into the fire to be burned! Thus saith the Lord God of Hosts!

JORDAN48
"As a devout Christian, I love my neighbor, all men, regardless of their chosen lifestyle, but I decry their sin before God, who made us male and female! Now it is becoming incumbent upon all the rest of us to embrace their sickness and call it holy! I shall NEVER agree to that premise!"

Which god are you talking about?. I don't know if you have ever seen it though, but I personally know some gods who permit homosexuality.

Much too much fuss is being made over the views of a pageant contestant regarding same-sex marriage.

The woman was asked an important question, and she answered honestly. My answer would have been different (as a gay marriage supporter), but this whole notion that the answers of pageant contestants must conform to the views of the judges or the audience is foreign to me. Would we have preferred her to lie or dodge the question? Disregard notions of free speech? I, for one, prefer her honesty, which allows the judges to "know what they're getting."

To those who say that anyone chosen to be Miss USA should hold "inclusive" or "compassionate" or "representative" views on this subject -- meaning that a Miss USA should necessarily *support* gay marriage -- how do you reconcile that position with what I assume to have been your support for the Obama/Biden ticket in the last election? The President and Vice President, presumably, should also be "inclusive" and "compassionate" -- i.e., "representative" of all the people -- and yet they, just like Miss California, are on record opposing gay marriage. So why the outcry over the views of a would-be Miss USA, and yet no similar jeering with regard to the President and Vice President?

Which god are you talking about?. I don't know if you have ever seen it though, but I personally know some gods who permit homosexuality.

Really? Please share.

Sorry gang but, no matter the stripe, showbiz rewards outrageous behavior. Miss Prejeans has just assured herself millions of dollars in book deals and public appearances. She'll be the darling of the bible belt. Not the kind of fame I'd wish for but it's a lot better than 99.9% of the dingbats that come through these pathetic pagents.

BHAMMER1
"When you look at the Jewish Torah; the Muslims Quran; Hinduism’s Vedas; the Five Precepts of Buddhism; and the Gurru Granth Sahib of Sikhs, you find they are universal in their condemnation of homosexuality along with their other morality precepts."

What are you talking about? IF you want I can show you instances where Hindu gods indulge in what can be called homosexuality.

Let me quote something from Quran as well which contains homosexuality(and pedophilia) Quran 76:19

If you're upset about this, then you're nothing more than a tool for Donald Trump. Do you really think Perez was the best choice to judge the contest? No. He was just more likely than other potential judges to stir things up and get the pageant noticed. Touche, Donald.

oops previous comment missed the quotes,

"And there shall wait on them [the Muslim men] young boys of their own, as fair as virgin pearls." (Quran 52:24)

"They shall be attended by boys graced with eternal youth, who will seem like scattered pearls to the beholders." (Quran 76:19)

It's not about the contestant's little "god", it's about rewarding or not rewarding someone like Ms. California for being a small-minded bigot. Whether it's called marriage or civil union, ANY two people should be able to form a legal framework for a committed relationship.

Jordan48: Your God really punishes people for loving the way He designed them to? Either your God makes mistakes or he's a real a55hole. You might want to shop around for a more loving theology.

I just find it really odd that her comments were probably more tolerant than Obama's on the issue during the campaign, and she's the one that gets dumped on for her views.

FWIW, I live in Canada, where both gay marriage and gays in the military are accepted, and the world didn't fall apart....

How can someone who can't articulate an answer claim she lost because of the answer, "choose one or the other; in my country...; choose same sex or opposite marriage." I just happended to see her that night and my thought was "shut up already you're making a fool of yourself". She came across as a "dumb blonde" - no offense to the other blondes in the contest;)

Can Perez Hilton be waterboarded? Vigorously?

That question was a stiff-arm that blindsided Ms. Prejean. I thought she gave a composed answer that was semi-coherent. No worse than many of the others and at least as rational as most of Mr. Hilton's writing.

I have to chase any "blame" here upstream to the organizers who chose Perez Hilton as an arbiter of talent, beauty and intelligence. He is a public fool and has enjoyed that status for years.

I hope that Ms. Prejean can elevate her sights beyond beauty pageants, although she is so awesomely pretty that she will continue to flash-blind people for decades. She will always be Ms. ALMOST America to me.

AKIL_CRAWFORD
"Really? Please share."

Let me start the way the "prophets" usually start. I saw a thundering voice from the sky while the clouds parted momentarily and I saw god, and then I asked god some thousands of questions. One of them was about HS and god told me that even though people make a big deal, its alright.

Now you may not believe me but think about billions of people around the world who would believe me if only I wrote these words a thousand years ago in a "holy book"

Reply to: MYKLEBARBER

Dear Jorda48: Please keep your religion to yourself. This is a SECULAR NATION OF LAWS, not a Christian Nation. If you had any education, you would know this and understand that it my duty to point this out to you as a citizen. Please go back to school and study the U.S. Constitution and then come back to me with a rational, logical, critically thought out response that is free of your religious fanaticism.
------------------------------

Well said, for indeed we are no longer a Christian nation! No longer entitled to His protection and blessings! And it is my duty as a servant off the Most High God, annointed by the Holy Ghost and power, to point out to you in these last days that my holy Lord shall bring HIS fierce judgement against all who will not obey HIS laws and defile themselves!

For as in the days of the prophets, now it is, as in the day of Sodom and Gommorah, that HE, in HIS infinate mercy and in love for all men, has called me out, sanctified me unto Himself by the shed blood of my holy Lord, Jesus, who is Lord of ALL and under the annointing of HIS Holy Spirit, to call this nation and it's people to repentance. For you have defiled His holy Law and yourselves in thy perversions and rebellious ways!

For as in the days of John the Baptist, even now, my Holy Lord comes to claim that which is HIS! He does not come as the unblemished lamb, slain before the foundations of the world, so that men might receive eternal life by the shedding of His precious blood, but as Lord and King and mighty Judge, who shall bring righteous judgement against the wickedness of men! Repent, for the time of thy judgement draweth nigh unto thee!

Did you think that HE would withhold his judgement forever, against the wicked? For that judgement is NOW at thy door, lest you repent and turn back from thy wickedness! Surely, it shall be better for Sodom and Gommorah, in the day of judgment, than this nation, for unto you were delivered the oracles of God which you have trampled under your own feet!

Two points...

1. You have a moral compass on Gay Marriage, but don't have a problem wearing a bikini or a dress that you can see all the way up her legs.

2. Does anyone smell a desperate desire to increase rating for the Ms USA pageant?

Posted by: frankv | April 22, 2009 3:42 PM
I just ask God to give me 15 minutes with that gay blade Hilton in an empty room. I assure you after I was finished with him, he would be as straight as an arrow. Of course that would be after he spent 5 weeks in a hospital.
-----------
Fascinating. Asking God to give you 15 minutes to put another man in the hospital for 5 weeks. Jesus of Nazareth would be so pleased.

To James10:

Actually J of N might be pleased with that outcome. Nazareth was a rough town in which even virgins gave birth.

Ms. Prejean stated:

"I knew that I was not going to win because of my answer," said Prejean, who was first runner up. "Because I had spoken from my heart, for my beliefs and for my God. ... It's not about being politically correct, for me, it's about being biblically correct."

***************************************

What Ms. Prejean said goes for me double.

I'd like to compare this beautiful girl to Susan Boyle. Both didn't care, that society expects them to stay in their respective pigeon holes - both stepped forward and showed the world that strong women have a voice that can not be ignored. I love them both for what I heard from them.

I have another theological question for the Xians here.

If indeed woman was created from man, which is biblically correct by the way, is it possible that women are inferior to men.

If that is the case should we go with Ms. Prejean or Mr. Hilton, at least Mr. Hilton is a male.

I am also asking this question from Islamic point of view since "Mohammad saw that hell was filled with women" and that "a woman's blood money is half that of a man's".

First of all, Ms. Prejean should have known that to give any sort of answer to that question that appeared to favor one side or the other in a biased fashion would offend somebody. That kind of question is based on the infamous question:"When did you stop beating your wife?" Any answer to that kind of question will be considered wrong by someone. The safest answer she could give that would offend the fewest people would be something like "I agree that we all have beliefs that are equally of value, some of which we may agree with, and others we may not aggree with. My beliefs are my personal choice."

Secondly, Mr. Perez asked that question specifically to see if he could corner her into making a statement that would become the next day's headline.

She bit - I think willingly - Hook, Line, and Sinker, and came away (I hope) a little wiser.

I would suggest that we waste no sympathy on Ms. Prejean - she got what she asked for - and I would also suggest that we waste no bile on Mr. Perez - he was there as a Reporter, and lived up to his calling.

Where were all these outraged right wingers when the truly virulent attacks on the Dixie Chicks were taking place?

Hannity, Coulter, Beck and all the rest of them were right in the mix, egging the haters on.

You christians are sure a bunch of crazy wabbits. Hopping mad, foaming-at-the-mouth cukkoo.

But you rantings are entertaining and hopefully help fill that void between your ears...

i have never understood why people think that gays getting married will somehow make my straight marriage any less valued or special. or why this will suddenly cause a collapse of the species. Just because my gay friends are allowed to get married isn't going to suddenly turn me gay or stop me from wanting to have children.

that being said, I think it was a poor move for Hilton to even ask the question, and that Miss California's answer was actually pretty inarticulate when you think about it. I would have been much more impressed if she had simply said "I don't think that's an appropriate question because I think it will be judged on my opinion rather than my articulation and presentation" or something to that extent.

I would think that for someone, especially wanting to be voted to represent the USA showing and understanding and support for the United States Constitution would be important.
Regardless of how this girl was raised, she was not there to represent her family or her particular church, but to submit herself to represent the United States.
She should have kept her comments to equality under the law and her personal preferences under her lid.
I think it's a shame that "Equality" and "Freedom of Expression" are such fearful things in a land dedicated to it.
The 1st Amendment is 1st for a good reason.

Considering that the loaded question came from a West Coast three dollar bill, I think the pageant was rigged and already decided, or condoning and promoting queers was the actual agenda.

Miss Californias' position on gay marraige is consistant with President Obamas and the majority of Americans. It is also consistant with Christian theology because the Bible is pretty clear that homsosexual activity is sinful. What's the controversy? She didn't discriminate against gays. They seem to confuse disapproval with discrimination. I applaud her for staying true to her faith.

Nor should we (and I'm a straight supporter of Equal Rights for all)have to accept your Close-minded, unchristian, pathology of Marriage just because YOU say we should, CIAP

ANY movement that discriminates against anyone for any reason and then says its in the name of of a Loving God offends me more.

I'm actually offended by the fact that a young woman was asked her opinion and then chastised for giving it. Gay marraige? Ok by me. whatever. Deciding that anyone whose opinion contrasted with the person asking the question disqualifies the contestant is wrong. Didn't we go thru the same thing with Anita Bryant in the 70's and decide it is wrong? Yeah, the question is different and the political climate but Why is 2009 different?

I'm offended by the arrogance of Miss California (Carrie Prejean) for believing she lost the crown due to the question. If you look at the scores from swimsuit and evening, Miss North Carolina (Kristen Dalton) actually had the higher scores and was the favorite to win. Miss NC also answered her question well, while Miss CA failed to give any answer, instead, talking about her beliefs. So I don't think Miss CA should have won. And we are not giving enough credit to Miss NC for winning, and instead focusing on the "injustices" to Miss CA.

The fact that a person gives a very honest and transparent answer about their values on same sex marriage and it leads to moral outrage and indignation that this person doesn't respect their Constitutional Rights so therefore doesn't deserve the right to represent American values, speaks to how the gay movement in this country has morphed into a very self-centered and hedonistic movement.
Has far as the issue on separation of church and state, its only going to be a matter of time when we get a lawsuit in one of the states that has recognized gay marriage against a religious institution for not wanting to perform a same-sex marriage as another violation of their Constitutional rights.
So I'm offended by any gay person who equates a person of faith who opposes gay marriage as somehow wanting a theocracy. Its insulting...but that's the mindset of a movement of that has become totally self-absorbed.

Screw the bible.

If Jesus was so forgiving he'd probably come back and say "I like how u guys have become more tolerant of homosexuals, they used to stone and kill them in my day"

Not that he will come back. He is dead. Can we move on and just accept that this is not about procreation (what a stupid argument), it is about accepting relationships that exist in society that are normal and harm no one.

To which u say "its a slippery slope, if we allow this where does it end/". To which I say, if we allow u to cease even one sensible law on the basis of religious beliefs in an unproven god, where does that end? The argument cuts both ways.

Lets just be tolerant. The only argument against it is that the bible said so. Pathetic.

I have just offended myself by reading this article. I could have been cutting my toenails, picking up dog poop in the back yard, staring blankly into space, or any number of more useful activities.

I cringe everytime I hear someone quoting from the religious right but it is absolutely shameful if as reported, Miss Prejean did not win because of her comments. Miss Prejean was not reprenting anyone or anything other than her personal beliefs. It is very sad that many members of the gay commmunity are getting carried away with this non-issue.

If you want to be gay - that's fine, but don't push your agenda onto me. She answered what she felt in her heart was the right answer and lost the crown. I DONT have to accept your lifestyle and I DONT have to accept you. Get over it.

I find it amazing that she really thinks there is a "choice" in this country. It was a nice thought, but so far from the reality of life for gays that I can't believe that she said it!

Perez Hilton's jab that Miss California should represent everyone is absurd. On a sharply divided issue, how can a person take both sides? This Miss California offered about as good of an answer as is possible without being completely vacuous. If Hilton didn't want a controversial answer, why did he ask a controversial question in the first place. Or maybe Perez Hilton prefers women to be mindless and sweet all the time?

Ironically, too, if Miss California's job is to represent her state, she gave the correct answer. Last year, the majority of voters approved a constitutional amendment that marriage is between a man and a woman. Evidently, her views are not all that radical or right-wing since the majority of the people in left-leaning California agreed with her.

To me, the more serious outrage here is why Perez Hilton was selected to be a judge of a pageant.

Miss USA represents all Americans at lease that's what I thought. I remember who a Christian support Slavery. During the 1960's I listen to many good God loving Christian express the faith and now blacks were not as equal as Whites as they used the Bible to prove their point. Few so called Christians remember how God loved all those he created. Jesus loved all people regard yet that doesn't seem to be taught anymore. Carrie followed the Christian faith she was raised with and people who are different don't count. I remember who as a child a man called me the N word and said God made a mistake creating blacks. We live with laws but nothing in the Bible teaching from God says one person should be excluded. Carrie didn't read Judge and you will be Judged. I would like a person who respects all God's children even if that's not what is taught right now in Christian America. If people choose to use God, at lease they should use his correct teachings.

I hate to tell people this, but gay men are a HUGE percentage of beauty pageant audiences.

If I entered a "beard and potbelly guy" pageant at the Tabernacle of Christian Intolerance and said I didn't like religions where some moron got up in front of a crowd and got them stamping their feet and shouting "Praise Jeebus" every time the preacher called on them to reject people who don't take The Babble lit'rilly, I would expect to lose the contest.

No news here. Move along...

You know, as a gay man, I think legal gay marriage is way overdue.

I also think Perez Hilton is a dunderhead. He picks the contestant who goes to some bible college to ask this particular question to, just so he can play gotcha with her personal religious beliefs.

In the alternate universe of beauty pageants, a contestant should be judged on whether the answer to her question is well-expressed, not on whether it's, in ANYONE's view, right or wrong. He asked her what she thought, and she answered. Did she express herself well? If so, she gets a pass.

It's incomprehensible to me that I'm defending some empty-headed blonde beauty contestant who's opposed to same-sex marriage over a gay man, but there you are. Perez Hilton should try to find the alternate universe in which he could actually be relevant.

Prejean did nothing but recite the standard definition of "marriage". And for that, she is a b*tch and the "C word".

This is typical liberal fascism.

Posted by: JimMF | April 22, 2009 3:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment

If "typical liberal fascism" is calling someone a few names, I'll take it over the typical, electrodes to the genitals, water boarding, sexual assault, and straight up murdering brand of fascism the right wing likes to practice.

Funny how all the GOP trolls see this as a "far left" thing, as though there's anything "leftist" about being homosexual.

Only because the GOP has become the party of deep south bigots and defense contractors.

Enjoy the wilderness, guys. Someday you may decide to reacquaint yourselves with the reality thing. I'm not holding my breath. Now go donate money the SarahPac so Mrs. Snake-Handler can run in 2012.

If you want to be gay - that's fine, but don't push your agenda onto me. She answered what she felt in her heart was the right answer and lost the crown. I DONT have to accept your lifestyle and I DONT have to accept you. Get over it.

==

If having a picture of my partner and I on my desk at work is "pushing my agenda" then you can take your own agenda and stick it sideways up your own rear end.

And please, by all means, make some snotty remark to me at work so I can enjoy the sight of you being escorted out of the building, your career over.

How you like them apples, knucklewalker?

Only God can change these people's mind. And that is thru FIRE. The nukes are coming and nobody can stop it. It's amazing how a ragtag group headed by Bin Ladin can cause so much trouble to America. It's because God willed it to happen.

More troubles are coming to fulfill the prophecy of destruction. Destruction is always a partner of stupidity. That's biblical and also scientific.

besides her backwards viewpoint, she just spoke badly and sounded dumb. She should not have won because her response, outside of her point of view, sounded stupid.

What does a pervert, homosexual know about women in a beauty pageant????? The most disgusting, repulsive thing is that they would allow a homosexual to be a judge in a beauty pageant??? Perez Hilton is a disgusting individual--totally creepy---

WHAT THE HELL IS A HO*MO DOING JUDGING A BEAUTY PAGEANT?????!!!!!!

What's offensive is the unfounded claim she lost because of her frankness, when the opposite is probably true: Her answer was classic equivocation, the kind of dishonest mumbo-jumbo craven politicians sink to when hoping to please everyone.

Miss South Carolina was merely incoherent on a subject she had never considered. It was honest gibberish.

Miss California, in contrast, admits to caring deeply about the issue, so her being wrong on the facts amounts to talking our of both sides of her mouth. Like Palin she praises choice while opposing it.

Whats more insulting is that she uses the term "opposite marriage".

FYI, there were several other nominees that could have made runner up. I think it was quite fair.

Plus who watches Miss USA? Oh gay people...maybe thats why Perez Hilton and other gay advocates were the judges. Miss California needs to go back to her "country" I think she meant "California" and think about actually doing something with her life than live a future as a playboy bunny.

The response to her answer was extremely offensive. The idea that she had to pass a litmus test when the majority of the people in the state she represents agreed with her.

I'm still waiting to hear the outrage regarding the misogyny of a pageant judge calling a contestant B--ch & c-nt just because a contestant disagrees with him.

jhbyer wrote "What's offensive is the unfounded claim she lost because of her frankness"

This is the common illness of left wingers - reading comprehension. You should read Perez Hiltons's comments again and again and again.

Another illness is their lack of logic. All left wingers are evolutionists. What's the logic of a brainless earth producing lots of brains? Why can bees fly with efficient homing device when the earth is so dumb just turning in circles?

What's more amazing is they call themselves SCIENTIFIC and those who question them, they call illiterate.

What a bunch of brainless idiots.

Yay! Yet another victory for us crazy satanic liberals over the holy rollers! Let's run them out! If Mexico won't take them, I'm sure Venezuela will!

Christians! Read this!

1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

So by this, we're all going to hell? If not, please explain. This is the infallible Word of the Most High God, is it not?

There ya have it;
Palin/Prejean 2012

;-)

Just another egocentric and narcisstic attempt at self promotion by Perez Hilton .... this had nothing to do with Gay Rights.

resident psychotic spidermean2 wrote:

"Only God can change these people's mind. And that is thru FIRE. The nukes are coming and nobody can stop it. It's amazing how a ragtag group headed by Bin Ladin can cause so much trouble to America. It's because God willed it to happen."

==

You need to see a shrink. Better yet, just go straight to the loony bin and check in, you'll probably be there the rest of your "life."

You forgot the mention evolution. Slipping?

Oh, and why are you fools on washingtonpost.com? Did you forget how to spell washingtontimes.com?

Spidey my man, a gem buddy:
"Destruction is always a partner of stupidity. That's biblical and also scientific"

How is that scientific? What einsteins destruction to stupidity ratio? Why havent u been destroyed yet?

Prejean should not be labeled a bigot for simply expressing a view about marriage. She expressed no malice toward gay persons; she only stated her honest view, which persons like Bill Clinton and John Kerry have also stated. They said they were in favor of marriage between a man and a woman only, but favored civil unions between partners of the same sex. I personally support gay rights and equal treatment of all persons regardless of sexual preferance. I believe that persons of the same sex ought to be able to make a commitment to each other through a civil union that affords them the same rights and privileges as married persons. But I simply believe that this civil union should not be called a marriage since a marriage is something that has been defined by most of our laws and all of our traditions as between a man and a women. I respect that tradition and I think it should be upheld. That's what the meaning of marriage is - a union between a man and a woman. That view does not make me a bigot or a homophobe and if anyone out there still thinks I am, then I guess I'm in good company with Clinton and Kerry.

Spidey my man, a gem buddy:
"Destruction is always a partner of stupidity. That's biblical and also scientific"

How is that scientific? What is einsteins destruction to stupidity ratio? Why havent u been destroyed yet? Oh yeah, god.

R u a member of the Westborough Baptist Church? U smack of the type that would picket a dead soldiers funeral.

Which one offends me more? The Miss USA pagent itself.

There's nothing more disgusting than a fudge-packer judging a beauty pageant...

For contestants that go on to win Miss Universe, the winner promotes giving to charities that support HIV/AIDS research. That's according to the Miss USA Web site.

She certainly got the Miss USA pageant a lot more attention than usual. Congrats on the marketing ploy.

"Evil often blinds people to what they are doing. Evil fills them with thoughts that they can do as they wish, that it is their right. Evil often makes debauchery and sin look as if it is a normal thing. Evil often seduces weak people into a web of false love and false lives. All this shows is that men and women are weak and easily deceived.
For some, it is a deception of sexuality, for others pride, others greed, and in others, oh so many different ways. God knows these weaknesses, and still He loves mankind and offers them the chance of redempton." - Through the Eyes of Jesus, volume 2

Where in the Bible does anyone mention something about "opposite" marriage? That has a host of different interpretations. It could mean we all should be bachelors or bachelorettes. Or maybe if the guy's a lefty, you're a righty.

Nothing wrong with Ms Prejean speaking her mind. I just hate to see people quoting the Bible selectively. Ms Prejean to be "biblically correct" should stop talking, put a veil over her face, make sure she is against pre-marital sex and stop praying loudly in church. These are all in the Bible.

chops2 wrote "How is that scientific? What is einsteins destruction to stupidity ratio? "

As scientific as the next U.S.-Iran war and more that are coming until the prophecy is fulfilled.

America became a world leader and power because of its biblical values. In the near future it will be in dire straits because of its lack of biblical values.

But many parts of America are still Christian and they would be saved from total annihilation. They are the future of America and the liberal left wingers will just be history.

perez is jelous because prejean will get more
guys then he will. You go girl!(and I dont mean perez)

I am so glad there are still some who will stand up for what is right. Satan empowers the wicked, and his home base is all the way on the left by the way. He still has to ask our God's permission to stage his tactics though.
The unfortunate unbelievers wander blindlessly as if they had an important agenda in life until they will soon face the truth and stand before the one they have learned to hate. Jesus Christ

Previous notations about the topic of gay sexual activities:

Hmmm lets see, in gay sexual activity, who plays the guy and who plays the gal? Who is on top and who is on the bottom? A coin flip? To say the least, an unusual situation. Then there are those "made in China" toys/strap-ons. Lets hope the FDA has checked them for lead and other toxic components. And do said "toys" come with sanitizers and/or sterilization instructions????

Lots and lots of "gays" doing their hot and heavy things on Internet tube sites but nothing about coin flipping, who is on first?? There must be some "Gaying It For Dummies" books out there somewhere. Hmmm, I wonder if said books/sites have to have FDA and CDC approval??

Is said activity wrong and worthy of a trip to hell? Of course not but to the general heterosexual population it is yucky, unusual and not normal to them. With that mind set, approval by the majority is not always sanctioned in law.

The general population to include many of the voters in California, rightly or wrongly, find gay sexual activities, married or not, to be "yucky" and unusual and typically associate such activity with the spread of AIDS which is of course wrong. Said AIDS epidemic in the gay male community at the start of the AIDS crises will always remain unfortunately a stigma on the gay community.

" And after all of this rhetoric, gay "marriages" simply simplify and somewhat sanitize what are still "yucky" acts caused by a variant gene(s) and/or hormone imbalance. One wonders if stem cell research will find a cure??

Hmmm, would the embryos formed from the sperm of gay guys and the eggs from gay gals make more ethical embryos for this and other types of research?? "

Just call me old fashioned, but the thought of two men, or two women, claiming they are married is revolting.

And yes, I am an Obama supporter, and a democrat. I just think that the only marriage that should be permitted is between a man and a woman. The young woman was absolutely correct in what she said, and I applaud her for her honesty.

I think that it's silly when someone is asked their opinion to be upset when they provide it. Whether I agree with Miss California or not, she was asked to express her thoughts on the subject, which she did, honestly. Would it be preferable if we all went around saying only what we thought others wanted to hear? In case it's not obvious that is still considered a form of lying.

Why do we cringe and/or shout every time someone has a difference of opinion in this country?

So she is supposed to be a role model. Is it such a bad example that she says I was raised this way but I don't see any reason why a person can't choose who they are with? The truth is fundamentalists (in either direction will jump on any media opportunity to make their point); and will gladly use anyone to get there.

So Miss California is just the latest excuse for the warring factions to argue in public about an issue that the country is divided on.

For the posting:

This doesn't surprise me because as a child I was kidnapped by two homosexual men, tied to a bed and molested for two weeks straight....everynight.

Homosexuals are perverted trash.

____________________________________________

I truly am sorry for your experience. I know many many people who have been abused. Some by the same sex, some by the opposite. What I think you should consider is if you were molested by a member of the opposite sex if you would still hold all heterosexuals responsible and equally perverted as the perpetrator. Or again if the person were black or Asian, etc.

Again, I do not undermine your suffering, only ask you to consider how it may have clouded your view. I know several people who were exposed to the more perverted aspects of the gay community. These exist also in the straight community.

I am straight, but I firmly believe the following:

All gays are not pedophiles, they are not perverts, and they are capable of being monogamous insomuch as heterosexuals do or do not embody these traits.

A lot of the comments on this story have been hateful. Everyone is demanding their freedom of speech while insisting the opposite group should shut up and stay home. If we are to be a truly tolerant society we need to respect each other first, and the legislation will follow.

What most people miss is the reality of what is known as a "gay community" and what in includes. This community began underground and began to surface in the 1970s and because "coming out of the closet" was a social nightmare during the decade, these people learned to form a political group that continued to pick up support. The support reached into a mini civil rights movement toward AIDS and education and hate crime. This movement also reached into public education and sex education actually taking advantage of the confusion many teens experience,praying on that first sexual experience of experimentation and removing a stigma.

The political group today has much more power and it has its subgroups, such as trans-sexuals, gender confusion or dysphoria where in California, the state will actually pay for a sex change. There are intersexed folks, who look confusing and you can't really tell if they are a man or a women. Also included are the bisexuals. All have different views from the triditional gay or lesbian people, however all seem to get together on the issue of rights and marriage.

Politically, this group has gained some power and have worked themselves into positions where they can impose their opinions over what they believe is a threat to them.

Personally, I reserve my opinion of how the judge should be handled. I think Perez Hilton should have his tounge nailed to his forehead. We can all be thankful he is gay, in that he probably won't have any kids. Maybe he will get AIDS and crawl off and die somewhere of a fungus. Maybe he already has a fungus on his brain and doesn't know it yet, which is probably the case. None the less, we have to watch out for people like him, because it is the kind of hate this man carries around with him that puts us all in danger.

After seeing Miss California walk on the stage in her swim suit, I couldn't think of any man who couldn't admire her. And after I heard what came out of her mouth, I for one fell head over heals in love.

I think we need to see reports of who the judges are going to be in the future and be sure there is a balance of opinion of those who are judging the event. Clearly, the quesiton shouldn't have been asked. Since being gay is a lifestyle choice and not a world problem like starving people, quesitons of this nature should be barred from being asked. Political opinions or being asked to assert personal Christian values should not be asked of contestents.

Perez Hilton, shame on you and crawl back under the rock from wich you slithered out from and hybernate.

Who cares? I am busy with matters of consequence.

(I love both Jesus and my same-sex partner. The rest is just noise.)

God will close this debate with a big bang soon.

People should read the story of Sodom or suffer the consequence of their stupidity.

Forget her.

If she wants to be a bigot, that's her business but there is no reason why bigotry should go unpunished.

I don't care if it is their belief, pushing for a group of people to be denied their equal rights has no justification.

She should accept her second place award and maybe actually learn what it truly means to represent America.

The question should NOT have been asked of a beauty queen contestant in the first place! Were these girls asked to give their opinion of waterboarding too?

One would think that in a democracy, the people who were in the majority would be allowed to express their opinions without fear of being berated in the press.

Instead, it's the vocal minorities.

As a heterosexual man I am tolerant towards those who have different sexual views. I also support same sex marriage but I am re-examining my views after listening to the intolerant views of Perez Hilton. What a bigot. In a beauty contest he should not have been asking questions requiring a contestant to take a political position.
Like many heterosexual people I am often offended by the militancy and bigotry of many gay people. As a Californian I voted against restricting marriage in last years election. The next time I am called to vote on this issue I will think of Perez Hilton. I will either not vote or I will vote against same sex marriage. Generally I am for freedom. If a man wants to marry another man or an attractive ewe as long as the betrothed can bleat "I do" I think it should be permitted. I don't care what "God" thinks but I don't like Perez Hilton. What an arrogant jerk. Why did the Miss USA people select a gay man to judge the beauty of women? Would a lesbian be chosen to judge a contest selecting the handsomest man?

I commend Miss California for sticking up for what is right. She should get the Golden Halo award for taking a stand. People who holds to traditional values should not be berated for their beliefs by the media. There needs to be a protection for religious organizations and people to be able to speak up for what is right. Many believe the Homosexuals want to silence the Ministers for preaching that this lifestyle is wrong. That is why they are fighting to put that group in the Anti- Dicrimination Law. We need to protect the Free speech of ministers of the Gospel. This is not Communism. I don't want our nation to head in that direction.

Perez Hilton is an insufferable gadfly. I'm a liberal and I believe that the question was an insertion of a multi-layered issue into a vapid exercise.

If Ms. Prejean was really smart, she would have refused to answer such a loaded question.

The bigger question is why such a wholesome Christian girl would parade herself accross the counter of a soft-core porn meat market.

A pox on both their houses!

First - Hilton was wrong - grandstanding for his own amusement and PR

Second - He asked for her opinion and got it, what's wrong with that?

Third - is this an indicator of a Palin/Prejean ticket in 2010? I'm sure the far right will elevate her to martyr status and use her like they use Palin.

She was asked a question, she answered with honesty and integrity. I disagree completely with her opinion, but admire her loyalty to her own convictions and probably would not have penalized her; in this country she has a right to those convictions, however flawed they may be. Unfortunately, I also believe the question was posed in an effort to solicit approval of an agenda (albeit one I approve), not to test the candidate, and so was inappropriate for the venue.

She stated clearly that this is how she was raised. That's fine, it's how most of us were raised, and she's still young; most of us have come to understand that that particular lesson was flawed and have chosen to form our own opinion.

Of course, for the record, I also think she's shown her unworthiness for the crown by blaming this one question for her loss.

First of all "It's the Miss USA Pageant. It's about the Babes." She was the top babe in the pageant so she should have one. She gave an answer, that may not have been said the way everyone would liked it, but it wasn't bad. She said , "...No offense to anybody there..." which I thought was good and then went on to say how she felt "personally". She wasn't advancing any legislation she was answering a question posed to her by a gossip columnist. Get over it both sides. It doesn't matter. It's a beauty pageant and gossip columist. It's not the ecomony, the wars, the health system - aka the Bush-lite Legacy.

If the question was about race, and she answered she was a racist because her religion taught her to be that way, all you know what would break loose. Why is her intolernace, bigotry and prejudice acceptable when it comes to homosexuality because she was being honest?

First, Perez Hilton makes his living by being obnoxious. The pageant organizers should've known what they were getting. He continued to behave badly with his comments after the pageant. You can just bet Donald Trump (pageant owner) is loving the attention.

Second, Miss California also behaved badly in going on national TV and not offering one gracious word to the winner, Miss North Carolina. Never mind that Miss N.C. could've been prettier, had a more attractive dress or gave a decent answer to another political question. Never mind that Miss California got flustered and used nonsensical terms such as "opposite marriage." Oh, no ... it was all about her controversial stance. If she were an athlete, she'd be blasted for poor sportsmanship.

Third, one judge's vote does not sink a contestant. As in the Olympics, the highest and lowest votes are thrown out, and the rest are averaged, then combined with the average vote for swimsuit and gown. So, Perez Hilton has overstated his influence.

Fourth, ever hear the saying, "it's not what you say, it's how you say it?" Miss California stumbled, and Miss N.C. did not. The question segment is a test of poise and the ability to think on one's feet. Miss N.C. was clearly superior.

Finally, the pageant has been giving contestants this kind of sensitive question for years. Perez Hilton's question was approved by the organizers. Why is it that people are only now up in arms because of the questions' political content? Why is it that homosexuality is the topic that gets people more worked up than any other? What does that say about our society?

What the alternative sex community fails to understand, is that its not their sexual preferences that are the fundamental issue. Its that their sexual behavior is perverse and society should not be forced to accept it in the name of "civil rights". Society has a right and obligation to enforce laws on behavior. Its alot different being black than it is behaving in a perverse sexual manner.
Posted by: bruce18
*******************************************

Bruce, you are aware that there are straight people who enjoy some of the same organ/orifice combinations that you find so odious when engaged in by same sex couples, aren't you? Bedroom practices are not grounds for refusing a marriage license. In fact, when my husband and I bought our license, no one at the Clerk of Court's office asked us for any details as to how we knock boots. They didn't ask if we planned to have children or if we were even capable of doing so. They didn't ask if we really loved each other or if we just wanted to qualify for tax breaks and joint health insurance coverage. All they asked for was picture ID and exact cash.

Hilton is over the top - no question there. He's a gossip columnist - being nasty is part of his job description.

But what amazes me is that so many people are losing sleep over who won a freaking BEAUTY PAGEANT!

Whose bright idea was it to have this moron be a judge anyway? Could there possibly be a less qualified "man" to judge this sort of competition? On another level, we watch this sort of fluff to forget the world's problems, if we want hard hitting homo-centric indoctrination, we'll watch the Bravo channel!

lepidopteryx last statement is correct. Also people comparing race to gay marriage is like comparing apples to oranges. And Miss California had some nice apples.

Some Pharisees came and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"

"What did Moses command you?" he replied.

They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away."

"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. "But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.''For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife,and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

Marriage is an union between man and woman.

Two angels visited Lot's house and the whole townspeople mostly man came and demanded Lot to bring out the angels to have sex with them. Sodom and Gommorah were burned down.

At another time during the days of Judges, a Levite man stopped by a town in Benjamite territory. The men in the town demanded the host to bring out the guest to have sex with him. The host refused and the guest gave her concubine out. They molested her all night. The man chopped her into 12 pieces and sent her body to the whole Israel. The 11 tribes went war against Benjamite and demanded those who violated. But the Benjamites refused and war broke out between the 1 tribe and 11 tribes. The Benjamites won the two battles and late all men were killed except 400 people who escaped.

When the people of Noah's times became violent and corrupt they were all drowned by the Great Flood. God is patient and tolerant. But when men's sin reach its full measure that is when he destroys. Our nation is heading toward destruction as the nation Israel was destroyed by Babalon and Assyria when she forgot God and worshipped many idols.

I wonder what Ms. Prejean's Jesus would say about a woman who spends her time putting on makeup and wearing revealing attire in order to compete in vanity- and greed-based competitions, and using those forums to promote prejudice and intolerance against a group of her fellow human beings, rather than 'loving thy neighbor as thy self'. Is that what a true Christian is these days?

Oh the poor girl! Got discriminated against! SO now she knows what it feels like to be told you can't get married because you are gay.

One of the other judges, a former Miss USA, said she too was shocked with Prejean's answer, apparently because a gay man had sponsored Miss Prejean's "enhancement" surgery.

A deserving loss.

As always, the one group that it is permissible to discriminate against in the United States is Bible-believing Christians.

What effectively the judge -- and the many people who have written here -- are saying is: "You must violate your beliefs and agree with us publicly or we will crush you."

The Bible -- particularly Romans 1 -- makes it clear that homosexuality is not God's intention for human beings. While this contestent and I strongly defend people's rights to practice homosexual sex in the privacy of their own bedrooms, this is not enough for this judge or for others who engage in anti-Christian discrimination. They condemn us for believing the Bible and for expressing its truths when asked.

Now many do not believe the Bible. I would defend your right not bo believe the Bible. We will all find out someday whether it is truth or fiction. But please stop discriminating against us for our religious beliefs.

This woman said she was not interested in being politically correct. "Because I had spoken from my heart, for my beliefs and for my God. ... It's not about being politically correct, for me, it's about being biblically correct."

Then she should have run for "Miss Bible Belt", because as Miss USA she would have to represent ALL americans-- minorities and gays included. This country has a long history of stuggles for equal rights. They struggle because those non-democratic elements of our society, mainly christians, oppose them. Every generation has seen them since the conception of this country. But equal rights are ALWAYS ultimately won. It may not be timely or pretty, but they win. America likes equal rights. She would have been smart to align herself with the ultimate winning side of this argument. The American side.

It's funny how many people support their anti-gay position with the Bible. Don't they realize that having a religious belief is a choice? Being gay is not.

Science, which the religious community also use to defend their position with the argument of only men and women can procreate, has proven that being gay is a natural thing that one is born into.

Simply put, gay marriage is a civil rights issue and nothing else.

Miss California's answer is an embarrassment due to its ignorance of the facts and its narrow mindedness but worse, the pageant system itself is an embarrassment. These women think that taping up their boobs and wearing a lot of make up makes them role models? Maybe back in 1969, but not now in 2009.

The problem with her answer is that it starts with a false statement. In many parts in this country gay people cannot choose marriage because is illegal. For those there is no choice. Obviously Ms Prejean is not informed or deliberately showed ignorance to sustain her religious bias. Her answer in short showed not just poor wording but bias and frankly ignorance about the state of affairs related to the gay marriage issue. That is what sunk her. She demonstrated at the contest and her subsequent presentations her shallow knowledge about social and political issues directly affecting the conutry.

"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied.

Isn't it possible that the prohibitions against homosexuality were written for this very same reason?

How hypocritical is it for a woman who believes in biblical correctness would somehow forget about the modesty that the bible also talks about. Parading around half nude for the approval of others is not what I would call biblical behavior! Clean out yoru own backyard before you jump into others!! Another convenient christian.

Janeway1 - Don't they realize that having a religious belief is a choice? Being gay is not.
**************************************************************************************

It really shouldn't matter if being gay is a choice or not. Religious affiliation is a choice, but we have no secular laws that allow marriage between those of certain spiritual paths and ban it for others.
Whether being gay is a choice or not (and I agree with you that it is NOT), consenting adults should be able to legally marry the consenting adults of their choosing.

Her answer was not strong enough. Christians should not apologize for what God's word says. There is no question about what God says about same gender sex. It is unnatural and an abomination in His holy eyes. The Word of God says:

"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination" (Leviticus 18:22).

Same gender sex is also a mark of God's judgment and abandonment on a people who reject His clear revelation (See Romans 1:18-32).

Miss USA, and I do consider her Miss USA, should have given a more biblical answer, with no compromise. The word of God will offend non believers who want to justify their sin. Christianity in not a popularity contest it is the truth. And the Bible promises that Christians will be rejected, despised, and persecuted. It comes with the territory.

Doesn't Miss California have the same opinion as Our Lord and Savior Obama?

It's incredible that a religious forum brings out the most hateful comments in this entire online newspaper. I wonder how religion leads to such vilification of others, such hateful judgments ("Too bad AIDS didn't work"!!!). I think so-called religious people should look in the mirror, for the perversion they see is in themselves: they are perverting the ideals of love and fellowship and a higher power, and using them to throw rhetorical stones at the disenfranchised (not being able to marry is one form of disenfranchisement). These so-called "christians" should read the actual words of Christ. For shame.

God wouldn't judge women based on their looks.

Nor would he judge someone for whom they are sexually attracted to.

Hypocrites. Pharisees. Lesbians. It's all just name calling.

I agree with GFJMCGINNIS's answer. She should spend some time with gay folk before commenting, she would have a better understanding of what we struggle with every day.
It is apparent that she isn't around a diversified group of peers/family.

Her narrow minded opinion will change in time, and she will be embarrased at her comment...

At least she was honest...

valandsend,

You are taking the Holy Scripture way out of context. That verse says nothing about same sex sex. It is about divorce. Marriage was established in the Garden of Eden when God made man and woman as one flesh. It is written:

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them (Genesis 1:27).

Mankind is propagated through that one flesh relationship. Therefore, it is unnatural for the same sex to have sex.

I thought President Obama and the entire legistlative body hold the same opinion. The young lady is not only beautiful, she is thoughtful and courageous. We need people like this. What happened to tolerance? TBO.com sites this article and calls Miss California in a question a dumb b***h. Honestly, I am tired of the homosexual movement jamming its ideology down our throughts.

The intolerance by everyone is what is offensive. I say live and let live, respect everyones opinion, and it is time this pageants are put to rest.

dem4life1,

You sound like you have no hate within you.

Hate can be a good thing though but not in the way you are expressing it. The Bible says,

"The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil.
Pride and arrogance and the way of evil
and perverted speech I hate" (Proverbs 8:13).

Same gender sex is evil and an abomination in God's eyes. You will meet Him and you will not be so tough then. You will then seek to cover you sin and shame but will have no covering.

"And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account" (Hebrews 4:13).

"It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God" (Hebrews 10:31).

A friend of mine shared an idea on how to solve the gay marriage controversy (at least from the government perspective), and I think that it's worth sharing here:

The government should allow "civil unions"... for everyone. These civil unions should carry the same legal significance that "marriage licenses" carry today. However, the term "marriage" is a religious term, and the government need not and should not express a preference as to whom should be allowed to take part. Individual churches are free to decide whether they want to perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples, just as individuals are free to decide whether to subscribe to one religion or another.

With respect to the comments of the young lady competing in the beauty pageant, I can't say that I agree with her stance on the gay marriage issue, but I respect her for acknowledging that we live in a country where people are free to express themselves however they want. The privilege of living in this country means that we have to allow people like this young lady to have certain opinions with which we do not agree. So long as she does not act in a hateful or proselytizing way, which she did not do by directly answering a question about her beliefs, then she will deserve and receive my respect.

Mankind is propagated through that one flesh relationship. Therefore, it is unnatural for the same sex to have sex.
Posted by: evangel7
**************************************************************************************
Not everyone who has sex, gay or straight, does so with the intention of propagating. There are those who claim that it's unnatural for straight couples to engage in manual, oral or anal sex, coitus interruptus, or the use of toys since those options don't lead to pregnancy (ok, CI sometimes does).

Hetero couples who can't or don't wish to propagate are allowed to marry.

Same sex couples who want children utilize the same reproductive technologies and procedures as infertile hetero couples - adoption, sperm or egg donors, IVF, surrogate mothers, etc.

Besides, mankind does plenty of things that aren't natural - cooking food and wearing clothing, for starters.

"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or OPPOSITE MARRIAGE."

Yes. Prejean was ineloquent I prefer the phrase ANATOMICALLY-CORRECT MARRIAGE.

Dear Tolerance Preachers,

Is there something in this world that is going on right now that you are intolerant of?

In the new modern sense in which "intolerance" is defined (That which does not meet the standard of modern political correctness. This new PC standard has been placed in the place of God's standard by fallen man). I think that you are intolerant of my post and of Miss USA's position on homosexuality. You are intolerant of God's word and His people.

News Flash: God is going to judge all ungodliness which includes same gender sex. Christians are warning you so that you might repent of your sin and be saved.

lepidopteryx, It is unnatural according to God. You are going to have to take that up with Him.

EVANGEL7: "You are taking the Holy Scripture way out of context."

And somehow, directly applying ancient verses to a modern-day context, without any consideration of the historical context, is OK.

EVANGEL7, it sounds like you have no brain in your head. You need a crutch to make it through life, and you have chosen the fairy tales contained in the fictional works of the bible as your crutch. Fine, but when your fictional characters and the BS they spew impacts my life and my choices, then yes, I have serious problems with that.

"And somehow, directly applying ancient verses to a modern-day context, without any consideration of the historical context, is OK."

Well. Consider this:

The term ANATOMICALLY CORRECT MARRIAGE is perfectly aligned with biological science.

lepidopteryx, It is unnatural according to God. You are going to have to take that up with Him.
Posted by: evangel7
**************************************************************************************
It may be unnatural according to YOUR god, but your god's opinions don't cut any ice with me. My gods and goddesses are all fine with any form of physical intimacy among consenting adults.

Am I missing something here? Her answer was WRONG. Period. Full stop. We do not "live in a land that that you can choose same-sex marriage." (Horrid grammer, too.) It is an ERRONEOUS statement that "Americans are able to choose one or the other." Gays and lesbians are not free to marry in America, only in 5 states and DC. The remainder of the states do not recognize these marriages as legal and binding. This is not the "worst" answer, it is a "wrong" answer. Are contestants given any "points" at all for totally WRONG answers?

JANEWAY:
"Science...has proven that being gay is a natural thing that one is born into."

In all honesty I have yet to see one unbiased scientific study offer such proof. If you can offer a link or point me to a source, I would be willing to look at it.

The only 'science' most gay supporters can ever point to are 'studies' funded by their own biased groups, and have been shown to be fraught with statistical bias and inaccuracies.

On the other hand, I have seen studies that show those in the gay and lesbian communities report a much higher rate of childhood abuse (sexual, physical, or simple neglect), than the general heterosexual population.

I'm not a science expert so I can't speak to biology, but as a financial analyst I understand statistics and if you have a higher occurrance of childhood abuse/neglect in gay & lesbian communities than in the heterosexual population, you are hard-pressed to contend that having a same-sex sexual attraction/preference is as naturally determined by genes as is race or gender.

This struggle over gay marriage has nothing to do with Civil Rights, and those in the African-American community should be highly offended that the militant homosexual movement is trying to elbow their way in and play on the real struggles our black community faced for generations.

I have one question for the flock:

Why are you so preoccupied with the sexuality of strangers???

Had she lied and said "I believe in gay marriage" she would have likely gotten Judge Perez Hiltons vote (he who asked the question) and indeed won the contest.

Instead she expressed two points of view, her belief in choice (normally popular among liberals) and her belief in the Biblical interpretation of marriage (normally popular among conservatives).

A simple yes or no would have failed to accurately reflect her beliefs.

For her honesty and tolerance, she should have gotten Hiltons vote. Instead she is punished for it. Nice message there to future contestants !

DEM4LIFE1:
"....when your fictional characters and the BS they spew impacts my life and my choices, then yes, I have serious problems with that."

So when evangelical Christians feel their lives are impacted by the gay communities' works of fiction that are force-fed to kids in school, are Christians allowed to also have "serious problems with that"? Or is that intolerance?

I'm just trying to keep clear what liberals consider 'intolerant'. As far as I can tell, "intolerance" by definition is disagreeing with a liberal. A liberal disagreeing with a conservative is just honorable resistance.

I love the double-standards of liberals. Don't force me to listen to your conservative views. But excuse me for a minute while I force-feed my liberal godless views to your kids...

"Why are you so preoccupied with the sexuality of strangers???"

In our generation- we are facing a scourge of HIV/AIDS. It costs every person- but is only passed to those who share body fluids.

Unfortunately, immune-suppressed HIV communities harbor infections (MRSA, strep, TB..) that are dangerous to all in society..

I hope the flock takes a moment to reflect.

Once again for those eyes that have not seen:

From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, gay sexual activity is still mutual masturbation caused by one or more complex sexual defects. Some defects are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell. Of course not all having these abnormal tendencies, show it outwardly as alluded to in the following synopsis:

"Biology and sexual orientation is research into possible biological influences on the development of human sexual orientation. No simple cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated, and there is no scientific consensus as to whether the contributing factors are primarily biological or environmental. Many think both play complex roles.[1][2] The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association have both stated that sexual orientation probably has multiple causes.[3][4] Research has identified several biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual orientation. These include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure. Conclusive proof of a biological cause of sexual orientation would have significant political and cultural implications. [5]"

References are available on Wikipedia.

Perez set the gay community back about 10 years with his act last weekend.

Trust me, even the most open-minded middle of the road red-blooded Americans are turned off by the ranting of Perez, as it cements in their mind the caricature of what 'gays' must be like.

Perez made it clear that the gay community, or at least it's most vocal proponents, has it's fair share of intolerant, bigoted, hateful people.

The question from Perez 'what - in your opinion - ....' Her answer was her opinion - and quickly did the intollerance and hate start spewing from the mouths and blogs of Hilton and many other pro-homo sites. I think its ironic that hatred and intollerance of traditional conservative values comes from a group that pretends to espouse tollerance and love. I think there 'true colors' are shining through.

Likely she'll write a book, start a fan club, meet Joe the plumber, be given a show on Fox, and make MILLIONS off conservatives by selling them everything they ever wanted to know about how to waste their money.

Frankly , neither the question nor the naswer, to me, was offensive at all. She answered, just so happens her opinion is about the polar opposite of what a majority of Americans think. That's why she lost Ms. USA. However, she's unoffically won Ms. Conservative USA. Maybe when you guys secede (and please hurry) she'll be Ms. Republic of Texas.

"Frankly , neither the question nor the naswer, to me, was offensive at all. She answered, just so happens her opinion is about the polar opposite of what a majority of Americans think. That's why she lost Ms. USA."

Did the strong applause she got from the audience after she gave her answer offend you ??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XMvviFbkf0

Didn't watch the show nor the full clip, only a small section on Fox News. Conservatives are louder clappers?

"Conservatives are louder clappers?"

hmmm.. I hadn't thought of that.

Then liberals are even louder isolated whistlers ??

(hint: listen to the audience response to PH's question in the link above)

Didn't think of it...that's why you have us Independants around. Seriously, I found no offense in the question, the answer, nor the audience reaction. What's there to be offended about?

All that aside, listen to the answer carefully. She is not accurate at all on the answer, and where she got this information she thinks is factual is a mystery. Hope this isn't what they teaching in bible school.

Let's take a step back, evaluate the answer carefully, measure it against the facts, and I think most would agree she's pretty ignorant of reality and the ability of gays to chose and marry. But her answer is the future, that's the way it will be soon.

If you watch the entire answer she gave you have to know that the WAY she answered the question was worse than her answer. Implying that in HER far superior version of the United States there would be no gay marriage (and everyone would carry around their bibles most likely). She did not present her view in a dignified or respectful way, but a very condescending way which is by no means becoming of Miss USA. I would hope that the manner she answered the question cost her, not her answer.

I am all for the contestants being able to answer a question with conviction, but not condecending undertones.

Additionally, who the decided Perez Hilton is a great judge? He is a classless drama queen and had no place on the panel, though his question was perfectly relevant.

"But her answer is the future.."

Say what ?? with our uber-liberal government guiding the way of America ??

I believe our near future will be a wee bit more complex and troubling than "her answer".

That's just me- just saying- (of course).

"I have one question for the flock:
Why are you so preoccupied with the sexuality of strangers???"

I'm not, and could hardly care less about people having same-sex encounters.
But a sexual preference is not a reason to re-define marriage.

fr ccnl:

>...And after all of this rhetoric, gay "marriages" simply simplify and somewhat sanitize what are still "yucky" acts caused by a variant gene(s) and/or hormone imbalance. One wonders if stem cell research will find a cure?? ...

There is no "cure" for being glbt. However, there IS therapy for BIGOTRY AND HOMOPHOBIA. Avail yourself of it.

"The Gay movement offends me more.

We shouldn't have to accept perversion of Marriage just because the perverts say we should."

--------------------

No but you'll have to accept gay marriage when the Supreme Court rules it unconstitutional to otherwise deny it.

Even perverts (including you) have rights too. So be offended if you like, marriage equality is coming whether you like it or not!

"There is no "cure" for being glbt."

There is a cure. Its available to all GLBTs. Its cost-free. And its one hundred percent effective I know many who have taken it.

The cure is CELIBACY..

Great, an idiot judging the response of another idiot. Who really cares about the views of a pagent runnerup or an idiot whose sole claim to fame is that his name sounds like someone else's?

Seriously? If the "evangelicals" want to argue that this even matters then go for it. See how far they have sunk in terms of national relevance in such a short period. Or, they could spend time dealing with issues that normal Americans are facing every day. This whole thing is just a waste of time and energy.

""There is no "cure" for being glbt."
There is a cure. Its available to all GLBTs. Its cost-free. And its one hundred percent effective I know many who have taken it.
The cure is CELIBACY.."
---------------------------

SURSUMCORDA,

Does CELIBASY cure heterosexuality also?

Her answer - as non-factual as it is today and why she lost - will likely be factual in 5 or 10 years. Gays will be able to do the things she spoke about. Summary - her answer is the future.

Near future complex? I hope so, that's what makes life interesting. Troubling? Not feeling it.

Why does everyone overlook that her answer was ill-informed (in most cases Americans don't have the right to choose what kind of marriage they will have, and it's not at all clear that homosexuality is a choice) and inarticulate? While I certainly acknowledge her right to express her views and hope she acknowledges that those with whom she disagrees deserve a fair hearing, I think she failed to appreciate that in some circumstances, such expressions have negative consequences.

"There is a cure. Its available to all GLBTs. Its cost-free. And its one hundred percent effective I know many who have taken it.

The cure is CELIBACY."

I think we all know how that turns out, when people decide to be celibate and go into professions that enforce it. There's a huge human cost.

"Does CELIBASY cure heterosexuality also?"

Practicing celibacy makes you a celibate.

In the same way practicing varied sexual acts make you GLB or T.. When engaging in any of those sexual acts produces the next generation through procreation- come back and we can discuss curing heterosexuality.

"Procreation is a mechanism by which two living beings, a male and a female, create a third living being that is different from both the father and the mother."

I think it is legitimate to ask that pageant winners show some sensitivity to their nonpolitical role. It would be better to say something like "why can't we just all get along" than to disparage the rights of one group or another. What if she had spoken out against miscegenation?

Having said that, it is certainly true that many young people are uncomfortable with the reality that some people are same-sexers. I think it is contact with various people in the course of life which makes people more tolerant. It was a harsh lesson for Ms. Prejean, and she is a great beauty. But let me end by saying: "JUDGE NOT THAT YE BE NOT JUDGED."

"I think we all know how that turns out, when people decide to be celibate and go into professions that enforce it. There's a huge human cost."

You are confusing pedophiles, homosexuals, and celibates. These are three different sexual practices- they don't usually overlap...

There is a cure. Its available to all GLBTs. Its cost-free. And its one hundred percent effective I know many who have taken it.
The cure is CELIBACY..
Posted by: SursumCorda
**************************************************************************************
I assume you're heterosexual. If you were celibate, would you no longer be heterosexual?

A celibate gay man is still gay. A celibate lesbian is still a lesbian. A celibate bisexual man or woman is still bisexual. A celibate transgendered person is still transgendered.

Orientation is about the attraction, not the action. A man who is sexually attracted to women is heterosexual, even if he never acts on that attraction. A woman who is sexually attracted to other women is a lesbian, whether or not she ever acts on that attraction.

Another thought--maybe we should pass a law that same-sexers cannot naturally unite their DNA to create a new child.
THAT would put a limit on gay relations. Oh, wait . . .

"A celibate gay man is still gay"

Well no- he is a celibate.

That's like saying your fat if you've given up gluttony but still desire chocolate. You've denied your pleasure and you are NOT fat.

Read this from wiki:

"Celebacy termed as Brahmacharya in vedic scripture is the fourth of the yamas (according to Yog Darshan) and the word, literally translated means ‘dedicated to the Divinity of Life’. The word is often used in yogic practice to refer to celibacy or denying pleasure, but this is only a small part of what (celebacy) Brahmacharya represents. The purpose of practicing Brahmacharya is to keep you focused on your purpose in life, the things that instill a feeling of peace and contentment."

Even though she was just first runner-up, I am sure that Miss California can still have a successful future, wiggling her booty for Christ, and wearing her Jesus ear-rings.

how much for a night with Betty Lou Freebush?

"Ask yourself if you TRULY wouldn't mind having to live with that in your face every day. It's one thing to say "those gays, way over THERE, can do anything they want." It's quite another to really believe it and be willing to accept it in your own back yard."

The same argument can be applied to segregation, women's rights and religious freedom.

And seriously...in your face every day? Where do you live that you have couples making out in their backyards and having sex with their windows open?

Do us a favor: For one week, carry a notepad around around and make a note for every time you see a couple making out in public. Double points if the act is happening within five feet of you.

Day to day life will NOT change by legalizing gay marriage. You people act like gays will be allowed to come into your home and have sex on your couch, in front of your children, whenever they please.

It's already perfectly legal for a gay couple to live together. In fact, it's perfectly legal for them to kiss and hold hands in their backyard! It's legal to have a gay sex scene in movies too!

If anything, legalizing gay marriage would REDUCE the amount of exposure to homosexual issues because we wouldn't have these matters in the headlines anymore.

For those posters who are lying about the question asked of the contestant: the question was about what public policy should be regarding same-sex marriage. The question was not about what the contestant's religious beliefs are!

I am old fashioned and prefer the good old American way- the Constitution and the Bill of Rights - as the law of the land. I don't want this country to be run like Iran or Saudi Arabia, where there is a government-approved religion that sets the law. The contestant clearly answered that she believes her religious beliefs should determine the law-- an express, clear violation of the first amendment to the Constitution and an affront to the fundamental freedoms setting the American way of life apart.

Those posters who can't understand the concern generated by the contestant's answer are missing the slippery slope we are already on in replacing our Constitution with a religious theocracy in this country. Religious conservatives seem to believe that their aversion to gays and lesbians, and to same sex marriage, ought to be the law of the land because they are offended by it, or because the Bible(s) say it is wrong. I say to those people: you would obviously be more comfortable living under a religious fascist government. Please move to Iran or join the Taliban- don't keep trying to subvert and destroy our precious freedom and our Constitutional rights here in the U.S.A.

"A celibate gay man is still gay"
Well no- he is a celibate.
That's like saying your fat if you've given up gluttony but still desire chocolate. You've denied your pleasure and you are NOT fat.
**************************************************************************************
You're fat if you have excessive body mass for your height and a high percentage of that mass is fatty tissue relative to muscle tissue. Fatness is a trait; gluttony is a behavior.
Sexual ORIENTATION is a trait; sexual INTERCOURSE is a behavior.

Read this from wiki:
"Celebacy termed as Brahmacharya in vedic scripture is the fourth of the yamas (according to Yog Darshan) and the word, literally translated means ‘dedicated to the Divinity of Life’. The word is often used in yogic practice to refer to celibacy or denying pleasure, but this is only a small part of what (celebacy) Brahmacharya represents. The purpose of practicing Brahmacharya is to keep you focused on your purpose in life, the things that instill a feeling of peace and contentment."
Posted by: SursumCorda
**************************************************************************************
That may be how celibacy is viewed in your scriptures, but not everyone follows your religion. The most common dictionary definition of the word is simply abstinence from sexual intercourse. It is not cessation of sexual attraction.

I'm just wondering why anyone cares what Miss USA contestants say about anything?
Beauty pageants are old and tired and have lost any purpose if they ever had one. Popularity contests (which is what they are)should end with the high school crowd.

WMARKW, who's definition of marriage are you talking about? Yours?
My definition of marriage is a life long commitment of two adults who love each other. Period.
You have the right to believe in a different definition, but you don't have the right to force your definition onto others and prohibit them from having the same right as you.

SURSUMCORDA's logical fallacies notwithstanding, the various forms of human sexuality are not the issue here. The issue is about legalizing same-sex marriage regardless of the spouses' sexuality.

Gays and lesbians get married all the time, just not to partners of the same sex, except in a few States. Whether you like it or not, marriage equality is coming soon to a State near you so you better run and hide under your bed before same-sex marriages come around and eat your children alive and ruin your entire lives!

You guys really crack me up! Scared to death of someone else's marriage! Please.

Everybody HIDE ... the boogie man's a comin', the boogie man's a comin'!

What a bunch of pityful, wolf-crying fools.

She didn't say it should be illegal. She can speak her mind under the first amendment. If you don't agree, speak up and disagree. Beauty contests are nonsense anyway...

This is not about a beauty pagent. This is about having morals. If you are a Christian,Muslem or any other faith based religion and believe that Same sex Sex is imoral you are put down as a bigot. What next. You want to marry your Horse, Dog, Bird?
Shame on them that condem us who stand by our belief and are not Political Correct.

What next. You want to marry your Horse, Dog, Bird?
Posted by: kc7kpa
**************************************************************************************
I am convinced that I have the world's smartest dog, and even my little canine genius does not have the mental wherewithal to give informed consent to enter into a legal contract.
Meanwhile, if you're going to insist on thinking of other species as sex objects, I suggest you stay the hell away from my aquarium!

I think Hilton's gone too far in his criticisms of the young woman, and I'm fine with her right to have an opinion (I don't agree with it, but I think she has a right to it).

Still, her answer was terrible -- not the opinion -- the way she expressed it. She deserved to lose the crown for that reason and not because of her opinion.

The question was inappropriate. Her answer was inarticulate and inaccurate. Perez should have his larynx removed for his incivility. But people, please, please, get your mind out of my bedroom.

The more I look at this the less I think it has to do with her answer than with the question. Let's face it: for Miss America, people want a woman that expresses an opinion that NO reasonable person could possibly disagree with (e.g., "I want to end world hunger", "I want to make sure the blind, mentally challenged, etc., have access to opportunities", "I support our troops").

Point is, the question was a kiss of death. If she said she supported same sex marriage she'd probably also be rejected (#1 for having a settled opinion, #2 for having an opinion that a chunk of people disagree with). Same as if she had to answer the question, "Do you think federal officials should be investigated for authorizing torture?" It's a no win question. The whole situation is as much about submissive/non-confrontational gender roles as it was about the controversy of same-sex marriage.

By the way, I'm gay but I thought Perez Hilton's response showed him to be a real d**cheb@g. He's not representing me, that's for sure.

Gay marriage is NOT a civil rights issue like racial discrimination. Marriage is defined in the dictionary as a union between a man and a woman. You can't change the definition. If gay couples want similar legal rights to those of married couples (i.e. for wills, etc) then fine, call it civil unions and allow the participants in a civil union to have the same legal and financial benefits as married couples, but it's not marriage...never has been never will be. 'nough said.

Regarding the Miss USA pageant, bravo to Ms. Perjean for speaking her mind and giving witness to her beliefs even at the cost of the pageant. Attention America: this is what liberal America is like - they "cry" tolerance, but they only will "tolerate" you if you agree with them. It's a load of cr*p.

"This is about having morals. If you are a Christian,Muslem or any other faith based religion and believe that Same sex Sex is imoral you are put down as a bigot. What next. You want to marry your Horse, Dog, Bird?
Shame on them that condem us who stand by our belief and are not Political Correct."

------------------------------------

KC7KPA,

It is not bigotry just to believe that same-sex sex is immoral. You have every right to beleive whatever you like based on any moral code you prefer and you have every right to live your life accordingly (i.e. don't have sex with or marry those of your own gender). Live and let live so-to-speak.

It's only bigotry if you hate others simply because they are different or if you seek to somehow punish those who are different than you. If you want the law to discriminate against others based soley on your religious beliefs, then you are not only a bigot but you are a domestic enemy of our Constitution.

Shame on you if you seek to impose your religious opinons on others by force of law. Otherwise, feel free to believe whatever you like and rest assured, you are not a bigot.

fr jsypal:

>Gay marriage is NOT a civil rights issue like racial discrimination...

It most certainly IS. We WILL get Marriage Equality someday, no matter if YOU and YOUR ilk like it or not.

Deal with it.

JSYPAL - If gay couples want similar legal rights to those of married couples (i.e. for wills, etc) then fine, call it civil unions and allow the participants in a civil union to have the same legal and financial benefits as married couples, but it's not marriage...never has been never will be. 'nough said.
**************************************************************************************
Not "similar" - identical. That includes recognition under federal Full Faith and Credit (meaning that marriages performed in one state are ercognized by all the other states), AND federal benefits, such as spousal Social Security inheritance. Until ALL the rights and responsibilities of marriage are available via the same legal vehicle, it won't be "'nough said."

I propose that ALL consenting adults who wish to LEGALLY unite with another consenting adult, regardless of gender, be required to appear before a JUDGE or other representaive of the court to do so. Any who wish to have their union blessed by their faith community can make an appointment with their priest, rabbi, minister, priestess, shaman, etc. to do so, but clergy should NOT be allowed to act as representatives of the state in signing legal documents.

"Marriage is defined in the dictionary as a union between a man and a woman. You can't change the definition. If gay couples want similar legal rights to those of married couples (i.e. for wills, etc) then fine, call it civil unions and allow the participants in a civil union to have the same legal and financial benefits as married couples, but it's not marriage..."

------------------

JSYPAL,

Hold on there just a minute! The dictionary definition is not in question here, only the legal definition! And the legal definition includes same-sex marriage in several States already and more to come so you are just plain wrong there about the legal definition of marriage.

Civil Unions? OK. Then why not just have civil unions for all and leave marriage to the churches where it belongs? ... (because you obviously want the State to codify your religious opinion at the expense of others!)

But as long as the State remains in the marriage business, there is no good reason to exclude same-sex couples from equal protection under the law. And if you are sincerely proposing absolute equality by another name, why complicate the law by calling it something different when legally, as you propose, it is exactly the same?

"Everybody HIDE ... the boogie man's a comin', the boogie man's a comin'!"

Sorry to dampen your gleeful screed- but the Qur'an-believing Muslim is here.

Maybe you should read what Islamic believers have done to homosexuals throughout history and check out what is happening to homosexuals in countries currently under Shari'a law.

"Sorry to dampen your gleeful screed- but the Qur'an-believing Muslim is here.

Maybe you should read what Islamic believers have done to homosexuals throughout history and check out what is happening to homosexuals in countries currently under Shari'a law."

-----------------------------

SURSUMCORDA,

Good point but they are YOUR brothers in this debate, not mine!

Hilton and the Miss USA pageant should be ashamed. This was a beauty contest. Prejean should have been judged on the eloquence and clarity of her response, not its content. If there are only a limited number of permissible answers to each question then the contestants should have been given that list beforehand.

I hope she sues and I hope she wins.

If she didn't want to say things that gays don't want to hear, she should have never ran.

Everybody knows these kinds of events are dominated by the gay and lesbian counter culture. The language belongs to the people. When people are ready to call a gay/lesbian union a marriage, they will. Otherwise, to each his/her own definition.

Since when did gay rights trump religious rights? The gays have trampled on the religious rights of people who strongly believe that gay sex is a serious sin. Miss Prejean had every right to answer the question based on her religious beliefs. When the Defense of Marriage Act passed in the US Congress, the support for that act was very strong. It is time for those who oppose gay marriage to take a strong stand to preserve their own rights and beliefs.

"Good point but they are YOUR brothers in this debate, not mine!"

Oh. Really ??

I thought you were looking to me (and mine) to protect you from harm to you (and yours)..

"Since when did gay rights trump religious rights? The gays have trampled on the religious rights of people who strongly believe that gay sex is a serious sin."

-------------------------

HTGCR,

Hogwash!

Gay rights have never trumped religious rights and never will!

You can't name one single religious right that gays have trampled. Not a single one. Can you?

"Oh. Really ??

I thought you were looking to me (and mine) to protect you from harm to you (and yours).."

---------------------------

You and the Sharia loonies want the same thing. Government enforcement of you religious opinions.

Fortunately, I don't need your protection because the Constitution protects all of us from theocrats like you.

The Constitution guarantees that marriage equality is coming!

Now go cry your little Xn Taliban eyes to sleep while you still can because you can't avoid the boogie man (that is marriage equality) that is hiding under your bed waiting to eat you alive!

BOO!!

Sorry. That was mean. I know how easily scared you are!

BOO!!

I am glad she takes her Hebrew Bible at face value. I eagerly await her damnation of pig skins and the wearing of clothes of mixed fabric!

The question and comments here and on other blogs are just the "culture wars"

Basically, both sides say that if you don't agree with the extreme position they are are screaming..."You are a bad person"

And to a culture warrior, this is just another opportunity. It may be an athlete, a politician family member, or a common citizen that ends up in the spotlight. The unluckily party gets 15 minutes of fame or shame and then for the most part gets discarded after becoming a D list celebrity.

Her answer is not longer important. She has become a minor symbol. I wish her some measure of peace in the future.

HTGCR - The gays have trampled on the religious rights of people who strongly believe that gay sex is a serious sin.
**************************************************************************************
Have Christians been forced to have gay sex? Have you been forced into a marriage with someone of your own gender? Has your minister been forced to perform a wedding ceremony for a same-sex couple?
If not, then pray tell what rights of yours have been trampled.

"The question and comments here and on other blogs are just the "culture wars""

------------------------------

Working for equal protection under the law, holding the society accountable to the promises of our Constitution, eliminating discrimination based on sexual orientation are all worthy causes. Was emacipation or women's sufferage just a "culture war" also? If so, sign me up for the infantry immediately!

I personally support gay marriage, but this girl was in a tough spot. There was no way for her to answer that question and, as Hilton says, be representative of everyone. If she'd come out in favor of gay marriage, then the other half of the population would be angry. Given the venue it was a ridiculous question.

Sounds like a planned question per an agenda, maybe Mr. Hilton was hoping for the anodyne answer so then he could use it to show how main stream the idea of gay marriage has become: Ms America supports gay marriage!

Regardless, his response shows that he is a cheat, that is, not interested in the honest, heartfelt answer Ms Prejean gave. A cheat, maybe even fascist.

...or the fact that this is just more proof that *anything* that you do or say can be used against you in the Court of Public Opinion. Which is not a huge step from a court of law.

And that's exactly the issue that we are confronting today.

nice bikini...missed the evening gown...nice smile...nice voice...what's the criteria again?

Carrie Prejean, Miss California, offended me with the phrase "in my country". Does she live or is she from a country other than the United States?
Also, she was competing in the Miss USA pagent, which should offend her and her religious beliefs. Some people of "Faith" believe that her soul was in jeopardy because of the pageant.

To the self-righteous criticizers of Miss Runner-Up...

If you are so offended by her answer, and believe her to be a right-wing, hateful, bigoted, back-woods, ignorant person.....do you believe all the same adjectives apply to Barack Obama?

Rewind the tape to the Saddleback forum during the campaign: Barack Obama gave nearly the same answer, almost verbatim (with perhaps even more umm's, and uhh's), to what Miss Prejean said.

So I guess Obama is filled with hate, too...

Oh wait, that's right. You can't be intolerant, bigoted, and hateful if you are a Democrat. Only if you are Republican.

Miss Prejean and Barack Obama have the same opinion. Compare Miss Calif's answer last weekend to Obama's answer last year during the campaign. Identical.

So if Perez hates Miss Prejean, and loves Obama, and they both hold the same opinion.....

Hmmmm....someone remind me of the definition of bigotry again.

She is a beautiful example of Christian womanhood, and to think she shold have to endorse the filth and immoral life style of the homsexual simply to win her crown and lose her sole to hell she is a hero

I'm gay and don't believe in gay marriage. Marriage is based upon religious institution.

I'm not gay and I don't believe in any kind of marriage. Why would anybody do that to themselves?

She may have lost a crown that she could not keep, but she gained a crown that she can not lose.

To all gays, we (Christians) love you too much to lie to you and tell you what is sin is not sin. But, we also want you to know the fullness of God's plan for you, to know the forgiveness of sins and the mercy of God, to receive the salvation that comes by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, to know the healing God works in sinners saved by grace, and to join us as fellow disciples of Jesus Christ, living out our obedience and growing in grace together.

I do not like that Miss California, who was obviously the first choice and should be chosen, got declined and didn't get her USA crown because she spoke sincerely. I am not very religious person. As a matter of fact, my religion is such mixture from Orthodox Christianity, Judaism, and Atheism that being married three times I still did all three times only in front of judges in magistrates, never in church or synagogue. I, however, can't understand how people, who claimed to be religious, advertise their requirements to enlarge church marriages to cover same sex unions. I fully agree that same sex unions should guarantee its members the same rights and official marriage, but it is the pure blachestomy to require the church to bless unions, which can't directly result in reproduction, as that is what is the direct goal of marriages in all well-known religions.My condolences and support go to the sincere California beauty, who certainly, deserved the crown, and didn't get it because this judge Hilton is the abuser of his power of a judge and a snob.

fr usconscience:

>To all gays, we (Christians) love you too much to lie to you and tell you what is sin is not sin....

WHAT a load of twaddle. I'm a gay Christian woman who married my WIFE last year, and the so-called slavic "christians" just LOOOOVE to tell us how much they love us. Guess how they do it? By THROWING ROCKS AT US AT PRIDE EVBNTS.

Grow UP and get a real life.

"Sorry to dampen your gleeful screed- but the Qur'an-believing Muslim is here. "

I don't care that much what your Islam-based opinion on gay marriage is.

Just be sure to keep your burqas far away from the swimsuit competition.

aepelbaum,
I am PROUD to follow a spiritual path (Pagan and Unitarian) that DOES perform same-sex marriages, whether or not they are legal (which they are not in my state).

Perez Hilton is a no body. I applaude Carrie Prejean's honesty.

First of all marriage is a bibical word whom definition has been clear since it introduction and that is that marriage is between a man and a woman.

The fact that male and female call themselves gay and lesbian by definition means marriage is not for them. Marriage throughout hisory has been reconized by the state and the world as between a man and woman because the the world for a long time was influnced by religion. Now that the states are becoming secular the union between gay and lesbian is civil, therefore, civil union.

I fail to see how a gay man even qualifies to be a judge at a beauty contest. Surely all those lovely ladies sickens Perez Hilton. He may be more comfortable judging a Chip and Dale contest.

Do us all a favor and keep your perversion for wanting to have sex with another man to yourself.

Congrats to Carrie for standing by what she believes. The good Lord will reward her for her courage.

What does this have to do with free speech? She can say what she likes (and did), and the competition has the right to judge her based on her answer ... in fact, they must, by definition.

Does freedom of speech mean that one can say anything anywhere with no consequence?

Indeed, no one's rights were denied here. Her ability to publicly state her views was in no way impinged, and she holds no "right" to win whatsoever (nor does anyone else).

She exercised her right to free speech, and I've exercised my right to think she's a bigot. That's the end of the controversy as far as I can see. This is a facile straw man argument.

And is there proof that she would have won if not for the political reaction to her answer? Again, this seems quite a convenient viewpoint ... a nice little hypothetical to get us all in the mood for an unconstructive, unresolvable argument.

And who cares if she wins or not (other than her and her family)? If your response begins, "That's not the point," then I would think more carefully about the consequent following that predicate. If it isn't the point then it isn't the point and there is no point.

Hint: There is no point. If you're angry, you were successfully manipulated by Mr. Waters.

I'm a Christian.

I don't have a strong opinion about this.

I wandered through the comments on this post out of mild curiosity and with too much time on my hands.

I'm surprised by the hatred combined with Bible verses on some posts.

I'm surprised by the partisanship.

So much talking...how cheap an opinion is nowadays.

Mostly, I'm amazed that I've dipped a toe into the mindless fray.

I think its about time people stood up for what they believe
the problem i have is that we want to kick
God out of everything and forget HIS laws and Precepts and then we wonder why theres so much killing not only the schools, but now across the USA. I love this land and believe we can see a change.
Why not let Miss California speek her mind
the gay activist do all the time.
if you want to believe thats the way to live
then do it your doing it anyways right
look at all our children and what theyhave to put up with
no peace ---violence-sex- drugs and drinking
i say America Wake up before its too late
are we like sodom and gamora??????

Lets repent while theres still time and
let the King of the universe hear our crys that HE may deliver us from evil
by the way I think Mr Perez owes MISS California and apology publicly.

I will be praying

If you believe in marriage equality for all Californians, please visit WWW.INVALIDATEPROP8.ORG and make a donation to fight discrimination in California. Send a message that bigotry will not stand and that marriage equality should be for all Californians.

'Perez Hilton" (what a name, not his real one) makes it his business to set up spotlighted people so that they can fall into his "gotcha!" gay game. Miss Calif. didn't fall for it and dared to be honest. Then this little turd laughably says she's shouldn't have been political in her answer -- when HE posted a politically charged question to her!

As far as he's concerned, freedom of speech is his right only.

DILD's ignorant comment-:\"Even though she was just first runner-up, I am sure that Miss California can still have a successful future, wiggling her booty for Christ, and wearing her Jesus ear-rings."

Another bigoted comment by DILD. You show your disdain for Christians all the time dude.

It is sad, and pathetic.

The rules of this contest emphasize charm, grace, talent, beauty and presentation ability. No where does it allow for politics. This question was totally out of line and Perez Hilton should never be considered as a judge of any event that is non political. Ms. Prejean is to be complimented for her demeanor and poise. This Miss USA event was just cheapened by Hilton.

There is a slight relevance to the question of gay marriage. It tests the candidate's ability to handle a controversial issue in a diplomatic way. The pretty lady failed the test. She may get to be the next Anita Bryant, but not Miss USA. I hope the other candidates were also given difficult questions. Poor kid, at least she didn't say she wanted to work for world peace.

This is a beauty contest not a debate. This young lady is 21, as pretty as can be and looks fabulous in a swim suit. Who cares what her opinions are?

Counterww

I apologize. I guess Jesus would have chosen Miss California after all, not because of her exposed buttocks in the swimsuit competiton, but because of the high morality she expressed in her disdain for gay people, no offense to you or any other Christians "out there."

Which offends me most?

That Prejean expressed her honest view?

Or

That Perez Hilton trounced Prejean's chance to win?

Neither.

What offends me most is that a gay person is judging in a contest that clearly is for meant for heterosexual people instead of me! ;-)

Carrie Prejean -- Miss California -- said, "I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other ... same sex marriage or opposite marriage," then added, "I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman . . . that's how I was raised." "
--------------------------------
This part of her answer was very prescient indeed. Marriage equality is coming to California very soon (and eventually to the rest of the US). The younger generation knows it and does not object to it much as a matter of civil law even when their personal religious opinion is different. Although she did not articulate the concept very well, it's fairly clear that she is separating civil marriage law from her personal viewpoint on religious marriage. She's suggesting that the two concepts are distinct and can co-exist quite peacefully. In this regard, she is a very enlightened young lady.

Kallieh wrote:

"Also, gay people are not perverts. Clearly no one has corrected you on that point, CIAP, and there is no place for that type of wording."
----------------------------------

The Websters Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary defines "Pervert" as follows:

pervert; one that has been perverted; one given to some form of sexual perversion.

perversion; the action of perverting: the condition of being perverted: a perverted form: an aberrant sexual practice habitually preferred to normal coitus.

Now, I suppose the homosexual lobby will seek to change the common dictionaries of the world so that they can continue to preach the doctrine of devils in their quest to exercise their civil liberties, without feeing the shame or reproach for their deviant sexual behavior!

Now, let us burn all of those books which condemns homosexuality, after all, are they not "haters" when they condemn those who engage in deviant sexual behavior? Let us throw out all common sense while we are at it so that whole world can embrace their sickness.

By the very Word of God, in no way is it lawful for one who condemns the sin, to hate the sinner, by which these offenses come. For my Lord declared that HE is the judge of all such things.

When you see a road sign that says; "Wrong Way, Do Not Enter" and you choose to enter, do not blame the cop when he writes you a citation, but, rather blame yourself for not obeying the law.

If you have a child, whom you love, is it an act of "hate" to punish the child for being disobedient? Then do not blame the Lord God Jehovah when HE punishes you, and do not claim that HE hates you for repraoching you when you rebell against the truth!

His law is the ruler or guide that all men must obey, for we would not have known sin without the law. Without the law, how can man judge that which is right or wrong?

to those who say marriage is defined as a between a man and a woman and definitions can't change, I say of course they can! Go find a dictionary from say, 1900 and one from today. Look up the definition of "gay." Yea, not the same thing any more. Meanings change. Language is fluid. We redefine things all the time.

I personally would be happy if the state got out of the business of "marriage" all together and just made everyone get civil unions. I'll let the religions take care of "marriage," whatever that means, if the state will just take care of property rights, who has the right to make decisions for me in the event of hospitalization, etc. and so forth.

Reply to georgiacat;

Have you considered a "Power of Attorney" or a "Living Will", etc?

Once again: For those eyes that have not seen:

From below, on top, backwards, forwards, from this side of the Moon and from the other side too, gay sexual activity is still mutual masturbation caused by one or more complex sexual defects. Some defects are visually obvious in for example the complex maleness of DeGeneres, Billy Jean King and Rosie O'Donnell. Of course not all having these abnormal tendencies, show it outwardly as alluded to in the following synopsis:

"Biology and sexual orientation is research into possible biological influences on the development of human sexual orientation. No simple cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated, and there is no scientific consensus as to whether the contributing factors are primarily biological or environmental. Many think both play complex roles.[1][2] The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association have both stated that sexual orientation probably has multiple causes.[3][4] Research has identified several biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual orientation. These include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure. Conclusive proof of a biological cause of sexual orientation would have significant political and cultural implications. [5]"

References are available on Wikipedia.

The question was loaded. No matter how she answered it, she would have ticked off somebody. I fault the pageant for not recognizing that, not a woman who's put in a terrible position on stage and on camera by idiots. The only dignified answer to that question is the first one she came up with: "Huh?"

I'll put my 2 cents in this silly discussion. Since I have nothing else to do right now, till the weather improves to do yard work.

Maybe it was the unexpectedness of the question. But again what can be expected of a Perez Hilton? I did not watch this show, but I heard there were homosexuals and sympatizers in the audience that boed her. That is very uncalled for and proves their worth.

However is no small problem for girls and women, who after parading around in front of an audience of thousands or millions. With an outfit that leaves them 90 percent naked or 10 % dressed, depending on the eye of the beholder. To be able to explain their opinion in stronger and less confusing terms on this subject matter.

To her credit she did the best she could under the cirmcumstances that she had chosen to place herself. However it is not a "great" thing that americans can choose one way or the other; It is a disgrace, a shame.

This is what the Scriptures say: Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people. Prov. 14:34. Better luck next time around. Homosexuality is a filthy Sin, but sin is Sin and whether is that or Adultery, Fornication, Murder, Theft or Idolatry.

A woman dressed only at 10% of her body has a very short rule to measure and carry a very small stick point out the sins of others. But that's how a sub-standard Greco-Roman culture works.

Reply to georgiacat;
Have you considered a "Power of Attorney" or a "Living Will", etc?
Posted by: Jordan48
**************************************************************************************
I don't know about grorgiacat's neck of the woods, but here, assigning power of atorney requires a sometimes pricey visit to a lawyer, and living wills can be ignored or over-ridden by doctors and hospital staff if there is no next-of-kin to stop them. My husband and I were granted each other's power of attorney and the right to consent to or refuse medical treatment on the other's behalf merely by having a judge sign a $30 marriage license. Why should same-sex couples have to go through a more expensive process with less dependable results simply because they have the same dangly parts (or lack thereof)?

" the beauty pageant. Miss California, Carrie Prejean, told the Today show that she didn't win Sunday's Miss USA pageant because of her response to a question about same-sex unions."

OK. I have to say, unless something's changed about how they judge these things, you don't win a beauty pageant by speaking ugly things, ...if they really listen to your speech in the first place.

What part of 'beauty pageant' are we missing here?

"I knew that I was not going to win because of my answer," said Prejean, who was first runner up. "Because I had spoken from my heart, for my beliefs and for my God. ... It's not about being politically correct, for me, it's about being biblically correct."

'Biblically correct?' Did I miss a passage in Catholic school about the swimsuit competition?

Always nice to see the projected 'Political correctness' hobgoblin taken to ridiculous extremes.

You know, if the token verbal component even *counted* for much, I *did* have some kind of notion that poise and diction and at least seeming *articulate* had something to do with public speech, before you even get to content. :)

"I fail to see how a gay man even qualifies to be a judge at a beauty contest. Surely all those lovely ladies sickens Perez Hilton. He may be more comfortable judging a Chip and Dale contest."

Wow, Bowhunter. If giving men a tightening in the shorts is *really* the point of this bit of innocent Americana, after all, maybe you should advertise it. Skip the speeches entirely, and virtuous straight men can just pretend.

It's a stereotype, but there's a reason a lot of gay men make good hairstylists.

They're looking at your hair.

The runner up named two states where boys can marry boys, girls can marry girl, and stated that she was tolerant toward but not into queer relations.

To make this much fuss it was obviously a loaded question that only a queer could answer to a queer's satisfaction.

By the way, what did a homosexual have to do with judging the sex he isn't attracted to.

Now that Christian women can no longer be judged beautiful in CA, which religion will be disqualified next? Hope it isn't yours.

1st is last and last is first. All will be given a chance at Wealth Love and Power in their lifetime and God will Glorify your use of it, whether Good Bad or Ugly.
And you will definitely reap what you Sow.

The reason her answer was terrible was not because she has religious beliefs that conflict with Perez's agenda. It was terrible because she didn't really answer the question, she said things that aren't really true, and she contradicted herself.

She could have said "legally, I think people should have the right to marry whomever they want, regardless of gender." She could have even mentioned that church's should not be forced to recognize same-sex marriages. Instead she fumbled and stumbled, knowing that what she was saying was stupid.

It wasn't a great answer. She started out being too accomodating to something she didn't believe in and said it poorly to boot. But Perez was a hypocrite to say he couldn't support Miss Prejean because she had to represent Miss USA. Mr. Perez also has that responsibility with his hate-filled cursings of a contestants answer. His mother needs to wash his mouth out with soap.

i think it should be legal in all states so i wont have to move when i get married

hello my fellow American citizens,
welcome to "my countray." I truly believe in the depths of my heart and seas that when it comes two the union of marriage...
TWO OF THE OPPOSITE FIGURES SHOULD BE IN DA MARRIAGE!! tHAT'S IT YALL!
my momma taught me this when i was baking apple pies in the summer of 69. I learned from my pae pa too, cause thats the way america was built... on the foundation of Jesus Christ his self. Miss america shouldn't have burned any ones biscuits by this comment, them gay are too sensitive. Thanks for your time, RE-ELECT cain. Obama no momma!!!

I never thought I would see the day that a vulgar man that draws vulgar drawings on people's faces would be legitimized in the media and a beautiful, smart, conservative believer would be smeared by people that that think what they believe is right and everyone else is wrong. Conservatives and Bible believers are the only people that can be mocked in the media today. How sad this nation has become. It's hate to consider what the Bible says as true but it's ok to hate someone that believes the Bible.

As she explained at the pageant and on the "Today" show, Miss Prejean just stated what was the way that her parents and religious teachers had raised her. (And incidently, until recently, this has been the view of all religions, that homosexuality is very bad.) Yet because she expressed what is her religious belief, Miss Prejean was denied the Miss USA title.

I THOUGHT THAT ONE OF THE HALLMARKS OF OUR COUNTRY IS THAT THERE IS FREEDOM OF RELIGION!!

IS THERE NOW A NEW DIFFERENT LAW THAT SAYS THAT A PERSON IS NOT ALLOWED TO FOLLOW THE DIRECTIVES OF HIS OR HER RELIGION???

This controversy shows that gay-rights has really very little to do with any kind of "rights." Rather, it is a ploy to force people to break what are their moral/religious values to instead totally accept homosexual perversions.

I Try to imagine a place where all same sex couples could live.
Govern themselves care for themselves Defend themselves where they could do anything that their Society approved and they would not have to force their idea's on anyone but themselves.And then I remember God told us they already do. P.S Repent and Sin no more.

I don't think it was what she said - it was how she said it. She really did not answer the question that was asked - which was did she think other states should follow the lead. She could have answered that her state passed prop 8 which was the opposite stance and perhaps more states should follow CA. That would have been answering the question. She could have expressed that it was a states rights question and best left to the states. She could have added her personal preference to either of those and as long as she was poised, it would have been acceptable.
BUT SHE DIDN'T. She fumbled, she acted nervous - she was not poised. Miss USA represents all of America - not just straight America. I don't begrudge her or anyone their beliefs - but those beliefs should be articulated clearly if you are going to be in other countries.
So again, I don't think it came down to her not believing in gay marriage or answering to that effect or not being PC - it was that the manner of her expressing her beliefs was not up to what people consider a poised young woman. And please don't give me the "she was asked a harder question than anyone else" jive. Miss USA will represent US. Do you really want someone who falters and fails to answer questions representing you???

MRGB Too bad AIDS didn't work??? How ugly can you be? Did you know in Africa that it is mostly heterosexual women who are infected? That people can get this disease through blood transfusions or accidental needle sticks? Through using the same needles? White women, Black women & children who have never had a sexual union get this disease and die from it. It is not a GAY disease.
These queer people do not have an agenda. They only want the same rights that you have. It is a horrible disease and I hope you were only jesting - because it was not a very Christian statement, was it?

FHRB in that version of Soddom & Gommorah, you left out something - When those people wanted to have sex with the angels - LOT SENT OUT HIS OWN DAUGHTERS TO HAVE SEX WITH THEM SO HE COULD PROTECT THE ANGELS. What's up with that? That's like pimping your daughters out. Aren't you supposed to protect your daughters? Is that righteous to send your daughters out to be raped?
Some Christian attitude.

fr the article:

>..."The backlash to Prejean's commonsense comments demonstrates the naked intolerance of the militant homosexual movement . . . And if it gets its way in Congress, comments like (hers) may someday be considered a 'hate crime," said Gary Bauer, president of American Values (the conservative activist group, not the concept)....

Gary Bauer has as much credibility as Virginia Foxx, who had the gall to refer to the MURDER of Matthew Shepard because he was GAY as a "hoax", among other little tidbits.

Gay people are "gay". You can pass all of the hateful, anti-gay legislation you want and they will still be gay. Gay's getting married won't make your children gay. I personally don't care what gay people do. If you believe God is judge then let God be the judge. Having said that, I believe that Miss Prejean has every right to her opinion and if they didn't want to know her honest opinion they shouldn't have asked. Even though I don't agree with her I respect her right to her opinion.