Gossip blogger/pageant judge calls contestant “dumb b*tch” over gay marriage question
Well, here’s your liberal tolerance for you.
Gossip blogger/barrel-scraper Perez Hilton was a judge at the Miss USA pageant last night. He asked Miss California, Carrie Prejean, whether she supported legalizing gay marriage. Prejean answered respectfully that she disagreed with the legalization movement, but supported states’ rights to put the question up for a vote. She was booed:
Hilton responded by calling Prejean a “dumb b*tch:”
More:
A US beauty pageant hopeful was called “a dumb bitch” by a celebrity judge after candidly answering a question about same-sex marriage.
Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was asked by contest judge and celebrity gossip blogger Perez Hilton for her views on gay marriage during the Miss USA pageant at the Planet Hollywood Resort and Casino in Las Vegas, samesame.com reports.
Hilton asked this question: “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalise same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?”
“Well I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one way or the other,” 21-year-old Prejean said.
“We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage,” she continued.
“You know what, in my country, in my family, I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offence to anybody out there.
“But that’s how I was raised and I believe that it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you.”
Hilton, the self proclaimed “Queen of all media” who has campaigned for gay equal rights, called the answer “the worst answer in pageant history”.
On a video blog on his website Hilton said, “She lost not because she doesn’t believe in gay marriage, she lost because she’s a dumb bitch!”
The Miss USA pageant should be ashamed for providing Perez Hilton a platform for his intolerant bigotry and abuse of Carrie Prejean. Instead, the pageant director for the Miss California contest is condemning Prejean — and Hilton is gloating.
Disgraceful. The Miss USA pageant owes this young woman a public apology.
***
The pageant is a lost cause. Beauty contests are out. P.C. panderfests are in.
***
Just a reminder of Barack Obama’s answer to the question:
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- JammieWearingFool
- If You Disagree, You Are A Dumb Bitch « Vets On The Watch
- Brutally Honest
- Miss California Stands Up For Marriage! « Scott’s Slant on Politics
- Cassy Fiano » A shining example of how liberals debate: by calling their opponent a “dumb bitch”
- Whither “Tolerance” from the Pro-Gay Left? | Whatever Is Right
- More shameful intolerance from the tyrannical left and gay totalitarians. « The Western Experience
- Dear Mommy, I’ve become an RRE… « Get Clued
- Perez Hilton calls Miss California a dumb b*tch because SHE DOESN’T SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE! | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
- Michelle Malkin » Trash blogger retracts apology to Miss California USA; invokes the “c-word”
- Gotta luv that vitriolic, hidebound Lib jaundice.
- Perez Hilton’s Foul-Mouthed Diatribe Against Beauty Pageant Contestant, Gay Marriage Issue from GayPatriot Blogger’s Perspective « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- Miss USA pageant a sad reminder of PC gone wild « Wellsy’s World
- Truth from a “trash blogger” — Down With Absolutes!
- Miss California Carrie Prejean Gay Marriage Comment Controversy … Perez Hilton Calls Contestant a “dumb b*tch What Every Happened to World Peace? | Scared Monkeys
- Twink Derails Beauty Pageant; Hissy Fit Name Calling…. « Zipline Conservative
- Well we can stop wondering now « DaTechguy’s Blog
- Perez Hilton on CBS, No Mention of Vulgar Insults of Miss California
- Perez Hilton on CBS, No Mention of Vulgar Insults of Miss California | Got Access News
- Perez Hilton on CBS, No Mention of Vulgar Insults of Miss California | Business Opportuinty Buzz And Web News
- Shanna Moakler & Keith Lewis are Pieces of S***! « Mark Epstein
- More left-wing intolerance « Right Minded Online
- "God was testing my faith" - Crazy America
- Tel-Chai Nation
- Jeremaih Films
- Miss California Carrie Prejean Marriage Remarks Controversy - Roundup of Updates « BUUUUURRRRNING HOT
- Crowder Spoofs Perez Hilton Over Miss USA Kerfuffle | The Great Illuminator
- Are same-sex marriage advocates tolerant of traditional-marriage advocates? « Wintery Knight Blog
- Hating, Harassing, Thought-Control Intimidation, and Speech Chilling « Designated Conservative
- Is the worm turning? « DaTechguy’s Blog
- Carrie Prejean, on Being Fired by Miss California Pageant, ‘I Was Speechless’ | Sean Hannity Exclusive Video Interview « Frugal Café Blog Zone
- But I’m a Liberal and I Voted for Obama….I Can’t be a Sexist or a Racist!! | hillbillypolitics.com
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Proposition 8
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
American Thinker
» Sarah Palin and the low ebb of the cultural leftDoug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomBig Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump ScandalVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Nice Deb
» OGreen Room
» Times Slimes Obamic Climes
why don’t you show us all where the ‘right’ to gay marriage exists in the constitution, or anywhere else, other than the fevered imagination of gay wackos…
I’m sick and tired of hearing the “I can’t believe you equate homosexuality to pedophilia” schtick. Homosexuality is not a crime. Therefore, the two can’t be compared in that way.
But here is how one relates to the other:
Someone who is born to a certain race can not help it. They never made a choice.
Sexual behavior is ALWAYS a choice. Wait, wait, I can hear the screaming now.. You may be attracted to a certain person but you ALWAYS have the CHOICE of whether or not to act on that attraction. In other words, pedophiles know that to molest a child is wrong, but they do it anyway because they act upon an impulse. If they simply chose to not act, there would be no crime. Homosexuals do not commit a crime, but they do make a CHOICE of free will when they have sexual relations – as do heterosexuals.
So the relating of homosexuality to pedophilia, bestiality etc.. is valid. Morals are instilled upon us to help make those choices. If you choose to be a homosexual and it harms no one, what do I care. However, marriage, in my opinion (and that of a majority of people in California, apparently), is between a man and a woman. In other words, you lost, get over it.
As for this Hilton idiot, I hope she sues him to the stone age. This has defamation of character and slander written all over it. Even if it can’t be proven that she lost over his vote, his reaction will affect her standing in public for the rest of her life. I hope he pays through the nose.
Rush Limbaugh today is quoted as saying Barack Obama is “stupid”, should Rush apologize to him?
I’ll follow your tone but turn it inside out.
Nobody is this angry and ignorant over gay issues. I know what your problem is.
R4L please just come out of the closet. I know you’re scared and angry. I can see through you. Shhhhhh. There’s nothing wrong with you. It’s okay. You shouldn’t have to hide in the parks and public bathrooms any longer. Shhhhhh. It’s okay, sport. Let your love light shine.
The sissy Perez is just one more reason to vote against gay marriage.
oh gee such cleverness!!! you must be very proud of yourself…bet you tell yourself how clever you are all the time….cause no one else ever has…
You don’t think a homosexual can be a virgin, huh?
Tell me, if Ann Coulter decides to sleep with Mary Matalin does that make them lesbians?
If Ellen has sex with Tom cruise is she no longer a lesbian? Homophobes always equate the simple act with the sexuality or being itself. You’re lost.
Would you care if a pedophile has sex with a child? Would you care if your partner has had sex with a donkey?
No it’s not, and you know it, but whatever. I’m done talking to crazies today.
What else would u xpect from msm?
as tv goes…so goes the nation.
Okay, so if everyone on Michelle Malkin is not homophobic, then why aren’t you all supporting civil unions or the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?
Correct in that bullying creates a backlash.
What is your penis really designed for, Omu? We are, what what are, not what u whould have us be.
Really?
MM is going to post threads about the freakazoid Perez Hilton?
I’m disappointed.
Underseige,
Apparently, you don’t get it..
Virgins may be homosexual, but they haven’t chosen to act on their impulses. I stated that the urge is there, it’s the action that follows that counts.
Attacking media and film personalities is just stupid. I thought it was clear that I am not a homophobe – you are a heterophobe – obviously. I don’t care what people do as long as no one is harmed. A peodophile having sex with a child would harm the child so, yes – I would care and that is, in point of fact, what I said. If my partner had sex with a donkey I would A. Be impressed and B. Make a great deal of money off of it selling the story to idiots like you.
No, you aren’t done talking to crazies today because you will probably do a self affirmation at some point.
Now, I was rude to you and I called you names. How does it feel? Are you hurt? Are you going to cry? No, you will just call me more names back. This is fun. See if you can call me a bad enough name for Michelle to 86 you.. Come on, I dare you.
Last but not least – disagreeing with homosexuals makes you no more homophobic than disagreeing with Democrats makes a person scared of idiots.
Once again, the Left decides that it’s opinion must be just and all who oppose must be eliminated by degridation.
this question is old and tired. With the future of our country at stake, i could care less what u do with your sex organs. Just keep them away from me and my family.
The sex thing is a another ridiculous argument. Straight people have been engaging in anal sex for just as long as gay people have. Also, the mouth or hand are not there for sex acts, but they are nonetheless universally used for such acts. Don’t pretend that straight sex is “pure” and “natural” while gay sex is “deviant”.
Call, it, people. 7:15 PM Central. This discussion jumps the shark with right4life’s ad hominem attacks, logical fallacies, patent disregard for individual rights, and poor typing.
There are plenty of intelligent folks here who I hope will one day see why they’re wrong and that homosexuals are good, normal folks just like everyone else who deserve to have their love recognized by the state just like heterosexuals.
Good night, everyone.
The relation is completely invalid. I’ve discussed the reasons why the state would have an interest in controlling the two perversions. You lose on every level once you start discussing morals and try relating homosexuality to beastiality and child molestation. The laws treat them differently for a reason. It’s the the final straw for the bigotted and ignorant.
Perhaps you define “attack” differently in Europe, but I was using celebrities to make a rather clear point.
I’m teflon fool. I would have been 86′d a long time ago. Regarding your partner and donkey’s, maybe that’s you, but I’d dump her/him.
I lied, I guess I wasn’t done talkin to crazies that feel the need to relate same-sex marriage to beastility and pedophilia. Hey bub, try this, you tell me all the differences between Elton marry Rick vs. you marrying a pitbull, or Perez Hilton marrying Dakota Fanning.(Was that an attack?) Can your pitbull or Dakota Fanning enter into a binding contract? What about Dakota’s mental and physical well-being. What if you bang your pitbull and harm it, or it harms you, or you catch some weird disease from it. Luckily most laws in most states show that there is no comparison. You can type about esoteric “morals”, that you clearly have no grasp in equating and I’ll stick with objective logic.
Oh, really? I would not have known unless you brought it up. Don’t nationalaize your propensity.
What idiot thought having a gay man be a judge in a woman’s beauty contest was a good idea?
I came late to this discussion, so I apologize if I talk about something that’s already been brought up.
I’m in favor of gay marriage–that’s my personal opinion. However, I respect that many people feel otherwise, and I actually think this contestant’s answer was very well phrased and well put, particularly under the stress of competing in a pageant. She did a good job of qualifying what she said by saying it was her personal opinion, and she didn’t disparage anyone else. The fact she was then attacked for her answer, by one of the judges no less, is pretty absurd and disrespectful. Not to mention, that it’s an utterly ridiculous question to ask in a pageant–how could you possibly expect someone to give a well-reasoned answer in 30 seconds to a question like that? I think the question was less designed for a serious answer, and more a way for the sad, increasingly irrelevant Perez Hilton to prolong his already minimal fame.
If the infallible’s arguments were all about “rights” then civil unions would cover them. No, what the homosexual lobby wants is moral equivalence. Sadly, their militants, like Perez Hilton, use immoral tactics to force their way.
One nagging question I have, if the “right to marry” is given to homosexuals, what is to prevent them from suing churches into oblivion for refusing to marry them?
One nagging question I have, if the “right to marry” is given to homosexuals, what is to prevent them from suing churches into oblivion for refusing to marry them?
Why did my quotes get inverted?
Beauty pageants are ridiculous, archaic spectacles, anyway. Does this story really deserve serious attention to begin with, from whichever end of the debate you’re on?
Underseige,
What I said made sense, wasn’t offensive and was logical. That it didn’t agree with your opinion upset you. All physical sex is a choice. That’s the point. There is no magical force making people have intercourse.
Up until 1990, the United States Government considered homosexuality an “Immoral Act” and disallowed the entrance of openly gay aliens. Bush Sr. signed an Immigration Act then that did away with the concept. What a modern age we live in to go from “Immoral Act” to this trash on television and it becoming sooooo important 19 years later.
Prop 8 failed in an open and fair vote. Political Activist groups decided that they didn’t like it and committed acts of violence all over the state of California (once a great place I hear). Now, a psuedo celebrity judge asks a valid political question to a beauty pageant contestant and receives an answer he dislikes. Based on that, she looses (likely) and will, for the near future anyway, be derided as the lady who hates gay people. Her answer was articulate, intelligent and open.
You brought the celebrities in to it because, apparently, celebrities are important in your life. They aren’t in mine. Who cares.
It wouldn’t matter what I say, you will find a way to disagree with me and show what an idiot I must be. All because I disagree with you. I baited you with names because you fell in to the trap that all people who argue left wing points of view do – you can’t win on logic so you resort to name calling.
Done feeding you.
For the early crowd, I came up with a little poster for the Queen of all Name Calling:
http://thelcabroadside.wordpress.com/2009/04/21/perez-hilton-dumb-btch-misogny/
Like that’s going to happen?
It’s a lost world out there.
in other words, you cannot logically respond to what I said. no surpise there.
there is no ‘right’ to gay marriage. the effects have been studied in europe, and they are disasterous for regular marriage, and for children. all you can do is ignore it.
and yes gay marriage is a disaster for freedom of religion…but people like you are fine with that, because you’re at heart a fascist who cannot stand anyone who dares disagree with you.
the next argument for ‘rights’
What is Hilton’s frame of reference for judging a female beauty pageant? Why was he even asked to be a judge?
It’s like David Spade said in one of Hollywood Moment skits on SNL from years back, let the straight men tell us what makes a women physically attractive and the gay guys do the same for men.
As for Miss California, she deserves to come out of this smelling like rose. She, hopefully, will get a book deal, do several rounds on the talk circuit, and numerous quest spots; Hilton will probably come away with little more than a day or two’s worth of extra hits to his site and a couple of forgettable spots on tv.
The mere mention of Perez Hilton conjures up visions of this.
I have come to the conclusion that the gay agenda is aligned with every liberal agenda for convenience of the “common kill.” They all share the philosophy the “enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Their common enemy turns out to be Bible-believers and Conservatives.
Nature’s biologic purpose of having TWO complimentary genders is to _______?
Actually, I brought them up to make clear, salient points using recognizable names. If celebrity bothers you, you could substitute John/Jane Does with descriptives. If you’d rather not respond to the substance, because it causes you to think too hard, just say so. Your claims of “issues” with my use of celebrity are unpersuasive to say the least. The logic in the arguments are clear to any objective observer, and I’ll accept your decision to take a “pass” on addressing the beastility/pedophila crap any further. Smart move.
If you read my prior posts, you’ll see that you’re preaching to the choir here.
My only issue was with you relating homosexual marriage to beastility and pedophilia. Obviously, that’s been my only issue. By your last post, I see you have given up that rather disgusting and ignorant line of analysis. Good for you.
That’s just a lie. You insulted me, because you felt like it, and now you’re trying to be pompous and above it. Rightwingers and leftwingers both engage in name calling on this blog. So what, and get over it and over yourself.
Thanks. I’m full. Have a nice day.
Michelle I LOVE you but I think you’re a bit off this time.
First of all she wasn’t booed, she was overwhelmingly cheered. Wasn’t she?
Secondly, Perez Hilton? Who are you going to be taking seriously next, Nancy Pelosi???
A few quick responses:
Well, to non-discriminatory people like me who see homosexuals as being as much of a person as a heterosexual, I do think that a gay marriage is morally equivalent to a heterosexual marriage. Why wouldn’t it be? It’s two adults that have the same feelings for each other and want to share the same joys and responsibilities for their lives. How is that different?
And regarding your second point, you’re neglecting the difference between a marriage in a church and one recognized by the state. Nobody’s going to force a church to marry homosexuals if they don’t want to. They just want to be recognized by the state and get the same rights and responsibilities as a heterosexual married couple. Plus, why would a gay couple want to get married in a place that hates them? That’s absurd. I know a lot of you think of gay people as wringing their hands and plotting about how they can piss you off today, but that isn’t the case. They just want to live their lives normally like we do.
You can’t apply a logical response to a wholly irrational and asinine “argument.” I’ve provided plenty of thought-out responses to other posters, but your argument is basically, “Gays are pedos, they make kids do drugs, and you’re stupid!” and there’s nothing to say to that. But, hey, if it makes you feel better to think that you got me, then you go ahead and think that.
really sonny? I have documentation for the effects of gay marriage upon families..do you?
link
and from the same article…
when you have ‘rising out of wedlock birthrates’ then guess what happens? more crime, more drugs, more gangs…a dysfunctional community, as we have seen in the black community.
you on the other hand, have no evidence that gay marriage has a positive effect upon society in any manner…its all about the greed of the gays to enforce their views upon others….and at the same time limiting the religious freedom, and freedom of speech, of those who disagree.
ya got nothing, as usual.
don’t ‘think’ I know bozo.
list a hereosexual equivalent of NAMBLA…you cannot.
keep lying, its all ya got.
there is a HUGE threat to religious liberty from gay marriage…
link
we’ve already seen how hateful and intolerant of any other opinions the gay movement is…they want to impose a ‘gay sharia’ where any other opinions are not tolerated…as usual with the left some pigs are more tolerated than others…
now sonny, what documentation do YOU have to support your bigoted and hate-filled position???
right4life, friend, you can keep on insulting me all you like; I’m sure it makes you feel like a big person. Even though I haven’t done any personal attacks on you, you’re free to personally insult me all you like. I can take it.
However, I will take issue with your pieces of “evidence.” All you’re posting is two articles. These are opinion pieces, and as far as evidence goes, carry no more weight than any commenter here. The first one that you posted was not a study, as you said it was, but merely an article about a letter that five guys sent to the government. In the first sentence that the article quotes, it says,
Of course, you neglected to mention that in an effort to misdirect and give your position more credence.
You ask for “evidence” from my position, but the veracity of my position is self-evident. People should be treated equally under the law, and there is no rational reason for one person to be allowed to be married, and for a second not to.
You even called me hate-filled. I don’t see how allowing two people to marry makes me hate-filled. Frankly, it sounds like you’ve taken a shortcut and demonized anyone who disagrees with you on this issue.
But I’m not writing to convince you. The idea of equality, rights, and ration hold no sway to your beliefs. I’ve made every attempt to argue with respect, politeness, and reason, even when the courtesy is not returned. But hopefully someone else here will see what the two sides of this argument really look like, and maybe realize who has the stronger position. Using right4life’s own terms, I ask who has exhibited more bigotry, hate, intolerance, and lies?
If that were true, I would be okay with gay marriage, why would I care, it is the same in the law as civil unions. But, many couples will seek to force them. Look at the e-harmony lawsuit, how stupid was that!!
Many of them do. How great would it be to be a hero to people like, Perez Hilton? He gets to be on the Miss USA Pageant and hang around with celebrities. Maybe we can hang out with him too? While they enjoy their pseudo celebrity status, the rest of us have to pay for it? No Thanks.
really? you sure about that??
so are you just mistaken, or a liar?
thats where you’re wrong. why don’t you try to get your opinions published? the first quote, Kurtz quoted dutch researchers…the next is from him…and he has a very good track record.
the heritage foundation just an opinion piece? oh please…you post this BS cause you cannot deal with the issues, obviously. all you can do is play the victim…poor baby!! boo hooo
don’t forget the NEXT couple of sentences…
but no evidence would matter to people like you…you’re all about getting your way, and the hell with everyone else.
oh yes ‘equality’ who decides who and what is EQUAL??? hmmmm YOU?? please…some pigs are more EQUAL than others…
and why not pedophiles?? hmmm?? isn’t pedophilia just another ‘alternative lifestyle’?? why deny them their equality? what about polygamists?? hmmm?? your arguments can be used to justify anything.
obviously you are, you wish to deny the religious freedom of everyone else all os gays can impose their agenda upon the rest of us…the gay movement is a fascist movement, intolerant as hell, while proclaiming their ‘tolerance’…what a joke.
your ‘equality’ for gays, is opression and inequality for everyone who dares disagree….the gay movement want to impose their own version of sharia law…
people in 30 states have, and you’ve lost every vote…all thats left is for your side to impose it via courts or democRAT legislatures that refuse to allow the people to vote…
now which side is fascist and totalitarian??? hmmmm???
oh and uh ‘fallible’ you’ve posted zero, zip nada articles to back up your position….no surprise, since its hard to argue any public good for gay marriage.
She gives new meaning to “I wish they all could be California girls”.
Sorry, right4life, categorizing your attacks as ad hominem, noting your stance on individual rights, and pointing out your poor typing are not personal attacks. Certainly not at the level of you calling me “bozo” and “facist.”
And they may have been five Dutch researchers, but they have not done any research into this issue. They merely wrote a letter expressing their opinion to the government. Then the author of the article you posted offered his opinion on the letter. Getting published to a website is nice, but if those are sufficient credentials to earn respect, then you should respect Perez Hilton, too. After all, he has his own website!
And I’m not deciding who’s equal, but you sure are deciding who’s unequal. I happen to think that all men should be treated the same under the law, and that’s all I’m advocating. You, however, are saying that there should be special allowances for some folks, and special restrictions for others. Then you throw around the word “sharia law” when it’s you that wants your religious belief to be put into law. If it sounds a bit contradictory, that’s because it is. But I’m the facist, right?
You’re not doing your cause any favors by being vitriolic and hyperbolic.
Why in the world would the Ms. USA pagent that celebrates a woman’s beauty, talent and intellect have a flaming homosexual like Perez Hilton as a judge anyway? Shouldn’t they have someone who would actually appreciate those qualities in a woman judging who should be the one to represent our country?
Besides, he’s probably just jealous that she looks way better in a bikini than he does.
Let’s consider what Perez Hilton just did. He just gave Prop 8 supporters a very clear… and very beautiful… spokeswoman. Hilton should have considered that possibility before asking such a loaded question.
In the short term, the zero that Hilton gave to Prejean for that answer of hers cost her the crown and a bunch of glory. In the long term, I think that Hilton may have cost his own community even more.
To be clear, if things play out like my comment #238 suggests, I would be more than happy for Hilton to look like a goat at the end of all of this mess.
I’d also like to see Hilton sued somehow for libel / slander (I can never keep those two clear) for attacking Prejean personally on his blog. She didn’t attack him; she gave her opinion. He attacked her.
oh of course not!! you can do no wrong after all..
how do you know? where do you come up with this BS? you’re lying..but its no surprise, thats the MO of the gay rights movement.
you have offered no rebuttal either with an article, or with any logic, you merely dismiss what they say. you’re a typical liberal. unable to argue the issues, only able to parrot talking points. On top of that you’re arrogant about it.
laughable.
This is social ’science’ you cannot reduce human behavior to a mathematical equation. but what they say makes perfect sense. if you make marriage meaningless then you reduce the occurance of marriage. which leads to more broken homes, more fatherless children. but really thats one of the things you gays want. you have to get those new recruits, don’t ya??
thanks for admitting pedophiles and polygamy should be legal too. after all they’re just ‘alternative lifestyles’ right?
Orwell understood people like you ALL too well…
uh yeah polygamists, pedophiles, and gays should not be allowed to marry. and when they do its a sham, which denigrates marriage. the family is the bedrock of civilization, and we’ve seen what happens when families are broken up. crime, gangs, drugs, etc. a whole host of pathologies…and what does gay marriage do FOR society? nothing, no benefits.
thats exactly what gays want. to silence all who dare disagree with them. Gay marriage will criminalize christianity, which is one of the main goals of the gay movement. you are unable to argue this, or even acknowledge it. because all you can do is parrot the gay line.
as we’ve seen in CA the gays are a bunch of violent brown-shirted thugs. the label FASCIST fits very well.
Your premise is false on its face because if it was ONLY religious people voting for traditional marriage, it wouldn’t have passed in any state, let alone heavily blue-leaning states like California and Wisconsin.
There are those who hesitate to redefine marriage from all across the spectrum. But the people who always bear the brunt of the blame is religious people. I didn’t see any Prop 8 protesters have the guts to go to East LA and condemn the black or Hispanic communities for voting for Prop 8.
And, the fact that you can’t tell the difference between shari’a law – which says it’s okay and necessary to KILL gays – and those of us who want to protect the traditional definition of marriage is telling.
If this were really about “equality” under the law, civil unions – which would provide those legal benefits – would be equal without taking away marriage.
But this isn’t about equality. If it were, Prejean could say what she please without the backlash. It’s about forcing those of us who don’t believe marriage should be redefined into accepting a redefinition. And this includes religious institutions.
Because no liberal here can honestly argue and get me to believe it won’t hamper the religious freedoms of me, and others who believe in the religious definition of marriage. You are the same people who said dissent would be okay if Obama was elected, and a scant three months after his inauguration, we’re all “right-wing extremists”…
Neither are you, with your holier-than-thou attitude and “I know you are but what am I?” smugness.
Note to all Leftists: Countering an opposite viewpoint doesn’t have to be a contest of condescension.
EQ:
Is it fair to say then, that you support “civil unions” that would be equal to marriage in everyway EXCEPT they would be called “civil unions.”
Further, would you support removing the word “marriage” from legal and state use entirely using only the word “civil union” for both hetero and homosexual couples?
zeroangel, you make an excellent point. There are two distinct issues here: marriage under the state, and marriage in a church. Now, personally, I don’t think the state has any business in marriage outside of holding up the validity of contracts (and, to the state, that’s what marriage is: a contract between two parties). I’d have no problem if the state issued civil unions (to everyone, homosexual and heterosexual), and the church performed marriage (to whomever they wanted to, and rejected who they wanted to as is their right as a private entity).
right4life, I’m amused that you think I’m either liberal or gay, since I’m neither. My leftist friends would find such a thing very amusing. I’m arguing on a moral and philosophical level, but if it’s an article that you demand, then how about this one? This is a link to an actual study by actual doctors, not just a letter by 5 researchers who haven’t scientifically researched the issue.
You carry on this idea that gay marriage undermines marriage as a whole, but you offer no reasoning for that. You think that if gay people can get married, then suddenly heterosexuals will stop getting married? Why? Then you make the absurd claim that if gay people can get married, then it will be against the law to be Christian. I’d love to hear why that’s the case.
And englishqueen01, you talk about the black and Hispanic voters as though they are separate from the religious voters. I contend that they voted as they did because those communities are more influenced by religious beliefs. And I think you failed to understand my comparison to sharia law. Of course I’m not saying that your beliefs are as bad as sharia. Far from it. But they do have the same root: applying religious beliefs to secular law. If a Muslim says that wives can be beaten because it says so in the Koran, then surely you can see the similarity to a Mormon saying that gays can’t get married because it’s in the Bible. The laws, while having different applications, are rooted in religion. You say that this will limit your freedom of religion. How? How will allowing gay people to be married by the state prevent you from practicing and believing your religious beliefs? And for what it’s worth, I never said anything about dissent and Obama. If anything, I was fearful of free speech when you have a power-hungry executive voted in by a doting populace.
I’m also amused that I’m being called arrogant and condescending. I fail to see how. I’m trying to conduct myself without anger and respond in a positive manner. I’m sorry if that’s condescending. Maybe if I throw around words like “bozo” and “fascist” I’ll get more traction.