'Opposition to gay marriage' cost contestant Miss USA title

gurramok

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8009359.stm

bbc wrote:

The runner-up at the Miss USA beauty pageant says her outspoken opposition to gay marriage cost her first place in the competition.

During the televised event, Carrie Prejean - Miss California - said she believed that "a marriage should be between a man and a woman".

She had been asked for her views on the subject by one of the judges, celebrity blogger Perez Hilton.

"It did cost me my crown," said Ms Prejean, after the competition
The eventual winner of the pageant was Kristen Dalton, Miss North Carolina.

"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage," said Ms Prejean, in a section of the show that has become a popular clip on YouTube.

"I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman," she continued.

"No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."

The remarks drew a mixture of booing and applause from the audience.

Speaking after the show, which was broadcast on Sunday evening in the US, Ms Prejean said: "I wouldn't have had it any other way. I said what I feel. I stated an opinion that was true to myself and that's all I can do."

Hilton said he had been "floored" by Ms Prejean's answer, which, he said, "alienated millions of gay and lesbian Americans, their families and their supporters".

He told ABC News: "She lost it because of that question. She was definitely the front-runner before that."

Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, released a statement condemning Ms Prejean's comments.

"As co-director of the Miss California USA, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman."

Maybe she is just a blonde bimbo?

More snaps here http://www.missuniverse.com/missusa/members/profile/220

Insect Overlord

Sounds like they rigged the contest with that choice of question.

Sharpshooter

Live and let live I say, that's the way I was raised.

ScumLord

What a tool, saying you don't like gays at such a gay event. :rolleyes:

netwhizkid

What I can't figure out is why anyone would be gay when there are women are hot as her in the world. Plus she is a conservative +1 for me.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

She is entitled to her opinion, she doesn't come accross as someone who is completely opposed to same sex marriage. Pfft, another contraversial thread that will suck me in no doubt...

J.S. Pill

An File wrote: »

Sounds like they rigged the contest with that choice of question.

That would seem to be the case alright. Does the global liberal ascendency know any bounds!?

Tom65

Deny people that are different to me their rights, I say.


No offence, but that's the way I was raised.

AnonoBoy

Who would have thunk that stating you're not in favour of gay marriage would draw a negative reaction at a beauty pageant of all things? :eek:

Have those gays not robbed us of enough of our traditional male bastions of heterosexuality already? Now they've only gone and taken beauty pageants as well....

Greedy bastards.

dsmythy

So expressing a view that is shared by millions of other Americans is not allowed. Well it is allowed but it will be used against you in the future.

rainbow kirby

No place for bigoted views tbh. Glad she lost.

gurramok

Jeremiah 16:1 wrote: »

This is post no. 8.

Are you going to post at post no.16 as well?

Should there be a rematch of the contest without that question?

randylonghorn

An File wrote: »

Sounds like they rigged the contest with that choice of question.

In fairness, while I don't have any sympathy with her views, I am curious as to whether anyone else got asked that question, or any similarly loaded / barbed ones, and if not, why was it directed specifically at her?

gurramok

randylonghorn wrote: »

In fairness, while I don't have any sympathy with her views, I am curious as to whether anyone else got asked that question, or any similarly loaded / barbed ones, and if not, why was it directed specifically at her?

Maybe it was because California(where she's from) was in the news recently about gay marriage? (they introduced it but were forced by some court to drop it)

dsmythy

gurramok wrote: »

Maybe it was because California(where she's from) was in the news recently about gay marriage? (they introduced it but were forced by some court to drop it)

Gay marriage was stopped after a referendum on it during the presidential elections wasn't it?

rainbow kirby

It had been legal for about 4 months, but the Mormons basically bought Proposition 8 and are now trying to get 18,000 legal marriages invalidated.

gurramok

True. So the court introduced it and the electorate banned it!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_marriage_in_California

On May 15, 2008, the Supreme Court of California overturned the state's ban on same-sex marriage in In re Marriage Cases.[3] The four-to-three decision took effect on June 16, 2008.[4] The Court declined to stay its decision until after the November elections.[5] Some reports suggested that out-of-state same-sex couples would marry in California prior to the 2008 elections because California does not require the marriage to be valid in the couple's home state.

Proposition 8 is a proposed constitutional amendment titled Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Act,[6] whose proponents intend to override the Court's decision. The measure appeared on the 2008 California general election ballot in November 2008, and passed with a 52% majority.[7][8] The California Supreme Court has agreed to listen to several challenges to Proposition 8 as early as March 2009.[9]

laurashambles

Nice of the BBC to tidy up her answer like that. =] She went on about how it was great that she lives in a country where people have the right to choose between same-sex marriage or "opposite marriage" but in her country, in her family marriage should be between a man and a woman...

btw, what the heck is "opposite marriage"? - and in the vast majority of states you can't "choose". The fact that she said "choose" makes me think she's one of those "homosexuality is a CHOICE" people which makes me even more inclined to think she's a moron.

dlofnep

Well, she's honest. I'll give her that. She's just expressing her opinion. I'm not going to lose sleep over it.

AND FTR, I support gay-marriage and find it somewhat mind-boggling that anyone would object to two people committing to each other, when it has nothing to do with them at all.

randylonghorn

gurramok wrote: »

Maybe it was because California(where she's from) was in the news recently about gay marriage? (they introduced it but were forced by some court to drop it)

You could be right, actually.

It's still a very loaded question at an event of that type, where the usual standard of question is "do you believe in world peace?" ... and they still get it wrong!!

book smarts

dlofnep wrote: »

AND FTR, I support gay-marriage and find it somewhat mind-boggling that anyone would object to two people committing to each other, when it has nothing to do with them at all.

What about incestous adult marriage? A father and adult daughter for example. They're consenting adults aren't they? Or what about straight same-sex platonic friends who wish to "commit"? Or is that beyond the boundaries of whatever modern moral fashion that academia and the media have convinced you to believe?

The_Minister

netwhizkid wrote: »

What I can't figure out is why anyone would be gay when there are women are hot as her in the world. Plus she is a conservative +1 for me.

When did you get back?
Missed you.

rainbow kirby wrote: »

It had been legal for about 4 months, but the Mormons basically bought Proposition 8 and are now trying to get 18,000 legal marriages invalidated.

Actually, more money came from outside the state AGAINST prop 8 then in favour of it.:rolleyes:



I think it's rediculous to punish a contestant for representing the views of her state, as voted by the electorate.

jimmycrackcorm

I thought that Americans treasured free speech - or is that just for people on street corners and not for anything on tv.

netwhizkid

The_Minister wrote: »

When did you get back?
Missed you.

Big hug;) missed you too, back since the start of the month, it was a long two years on that desert Island, I swear I am never flying Ryanair again, the places they crash land these days.

laurashambles

book smarts wrote: »

What about incestous adult marriage? A father and adult daughter for example. They're consenting adults aren't they? Or what about straight same-sex platonic friends who wish to "commit"? Or is that beyond the boundaries of whatever modern moral fashion that academia and the media have convinced you to believe?

Incest between a father and daughter can never be properly consensual. Sure, consenting adults they may be but there are going to be power dynamics at play. Even then, Incestuous relationships between consensual adults is extremely rare. It almost always starts out as child abuse. It's two in the morning and I'm tired so I'm not going to go into this but I'm going to copy and paste this from another forum:

- father/consenting adult child: The structure of power and authority here is completely twisted. Not only did the father presumably discipline his child from a young age, but he supported and instructed the child to a great extent probably up to 16/17 years of age. 16/17 years of an unequal and one-side dominant relationship cannot be erased as soon as the 50-yo father and 25-yo daughter or son decide to engage in a "consensual" relationship. It doesn't work like that. I put consensual in quotes because I feel that it is impossible for the child in that situation to make a clear and fully autonomous decision when faced with the question of an incestuous relationship. The history of father/daughter absolutely clouds everything. It doesn't work. This applies to mother/consenting adult child as well.

- sibling/sibling: The power dynamics aren't as clear, but depending on age they are still in play for certain. With one sibling being older, there's the 'need to protect' factor, the 'babysitter' factor, and then general sibling rivalry. Here, I think cultural taboo plays an bigger role. The pressure and stress of the relationship being taboo would, I feel, make it impossible to have a normal, healthy relationship since most people cannot escape the expectations of society. And while someone might retort with "homosexuality was considered socially taboo," incest and homosexuality absolutely are not the same experience. What I mean is that homosexuality's level of "taboo-ness" is MUCH more varied; in some cultures, it's not taboo at all (i.e. Ancient Greece) and throughout history its experience has been different where ever you went. Today, homosexuality is more-or-less tolerated, if not totally accepted by everyone. With very few exceptions, however, incest is across-the-board taboo. There are historical examples of incest acceptance (Greek gods, anyone?) but again, to a much less degree than homosexuality. In short, homosexuality and incest have had very different experiences.

There are hetero marriages of convenience all the time. Would you have a problem with a gay male marrying a straight female or vice versa?

laurashambles

And that's before you even take inbreeding into account.

daveharnett

She has a lovely bottom.

nevershutsup

she got asked the question when she chose judge number 8 out of a bowl for her random question that corresponded to perez hiltons panel number. perez himself is gay and it was topical because vermont became the fourth state to legalise same-sex marraige. she answered the question badly.

randylonghorn

nevershutsup wrote: »

she got asked the question when she chose judge number 8 out of a bowl for her random question ...

Ah! ... in fairness, that would seem to negate the possibility that she was deliberately targetted all right ...

DonkeyStyle \o/

She should have given that waffling, non-commital "I believe it's all about integrity" answer the other woman gave when asked about universal healthcare.

netwhizkid

daveharnett wrote: »

She has a lovely bottom.

Now all the girls have lovely bottoms, isn't that right Ted?