http://current.com/items/89982487_miss-california-supports-adam-eve-not-adam-steve.htm

Who doesn't love a good beauty pageant? Miss North Carolina was crowned Miss USA last night in the US, but it was Miss California who drew boos from the crowd with her answer to a question about legalising same sex marriage.

She said, "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."

"It's ugly," said Scott Ihrig, a gay man, who attended the pageant with his partner. "I think it's ridiculous that she got first runner-up. That is not the value of 95 percent of the people in this audience. Look around this audience and tell me how many gay men there are."

Charmaine Koonce, the mother of Miss New Mexico USA Bianca Carla, argued back. "In the Bible it says marriage is between Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve!"

well in my country we don't allow same sex marriages but our government has taken it upon themselves to make it so gays have the same rights in their relationships and hetro sexuals!

You know that we are in some fucked up times when the comment "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised." is actually considered controversial.

If this guy quoted later, Scott Ihrig (a gay man), wants his side to be tolerated, why the hell can't he tolerate someone who states an opposing view?

The only other real question I have is why the fuck does that subject even come up in a Miss America Pageant in the first place? What's it have to do with how talented these women are in various categories or how well they appear in various outfits?

Sometimes these numerous "life-style" groups piss me off. Fucking faggots......

You know that we are in some fucked up times when the comment "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised." is actually considered controversial.

If this guy quoted later, Scott Ihrig (a gay man), wants his side to be tolerated, why the hell can't he tolerate someone who states an opposing view?


You can't go on TV and say "I think owning slaves is OK" or "I think women in the workplace is just wrong, it's how I was raised" either.

Fucking faggots......

Fucking bigots.

Those two examples of yours do not hold up as similar to what she said, imo. Owning slaves is wrong. Woman have proven themselves in the workplace on almost all ways.

There is nothing wrong with someone believing that a marriage consists of a man and a woman, just as I don't think there is anything so wrong with someone considering marriage to consist of same sex couples. Although I don't happen to agree with it, there's nothing wrong with someone thinking that way.

The issue was the reaction of the guy in the interview. Who the fuck is he anyway and how did what she say cause so much controversy, to the point of actually costing her the title, as many have theorized?

As to the "faggots" thing.....that was a joke, not to be taken seriously. I don't actually have anything against the little cocksuckers.....

She should have done her research, the gays follow the Miss USA pageant like CRAZY. At least my CA gays do...

She should have done her research, the gays follow the Miss USA pageant like CRAZY. At least my CA gays do...

According to many of today's stories on the issue, she did do her research, and knew full well what she would be facing had that question came up:

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95743

In the link, about halfway down the article (just above the youtube video link of the event) she discusses the trepidation of the subject and her thoughts concerning it. In other words, she knew the deal as to just what kind of panel and audience she was dealing with.
That said, she was hoping the subject would not come up, but of course, it did.

In that moment she had a choice to make: compromise her integrity and beliefs in the hopes of gaining the crown of Miss USA, or standing by her convictions and letting the obviously biased panel choose as they would.
For choosing to stand behind her convictions, she was demonized by homosexual activist and panel judge Perez Hilton and called several derogatory names in his blog, as well as losing her chance to win the event.

How's that for a shining example of tolerance in America today?

To make it all worse, she wasn't even using the event to carry out some cause for her religious beliefs, she simply answered the question posed by Mr Hilton. Yet, he decided to lash out at her the next day in his blog.

Mr Hilton is a disgrace to the homosexual community and a poster child for intolerance in America. According to her own interviews, Ms Prejean has been contracted by several homosexual activist groups since the incidents and they have offered their apologies to her and they want her to know that Mr Hilton does not speak for them. As well, The National Organization for Women along with several other women's rights groups have offered their support to her, albeit rather quietly thus far.

Personally, I don't think there is much in the way of a defense for Mr Hilton on this one. He's displayed nothing but contempt for someone who happens to share a different view than he does, used his position as a judge for the Miss USA pageant as a tool for revenge, and quite frankly, has made himself look like a complete fuck-face over this, in what would otherwise be a non-issue.

And before people start waltzing in with their names for me like bigot, fag-hater, homo-phobe, or any other ridiculous such thing, you should know that I would have supported her right to take the complete opposite stance on the issue. Had she been in the middle of a Baptist Pastor's Seminar and said that she supports gay marriage in the same manner as she said the opposite the other night, I would have still respected her more than anyone who would have called her a "dumb bitch" as this Mr Hilton pussy did for simply answering the question that was posed to her by him.

Fuck him and the dick he rode in on.

Winpost

Winpost

seconded

Had she been in the middle of a Baptist Pastor's Seminar and said that she supports gay marriage in the same manner as she said the opposite the other night...

Nobody's going to do that. You try that and you'll be crucified on the spot, and you know it.

And like hell am I going to support Hilton on this. I just don't think you're using common sense when you jump into a competition expecting to win while basically blasting the main audience. There's no point to even try then.

I think more issues have been spurred as a result of Perez's antics.

And Perez Hilton is pretty much the lowest common denominator of celebritum, next to Perez Hilton's ass hair.

Nobody's going to do that. You try that and you'll be crucified on the spot, and you know it.

And like hell am I going to support Hilton on this. I just don't think you're using common sense when you jump into a competition expecting to win while basically blasting the main audience. There's no point to even try then.

Maybe someone would not try that, but I would respect them just the same for their courage in their convictions just the same if they did. Besides, that was a slight exaggeration to illustrate my point, but you got the idea I would assume.

I personally don't believe that Ms Prejean did "blast" the audience with her answer, nor in her delivery. I don't think she was in there trying to push her view on anyone, nor was it her intention to use the competition as an avenue to push any kind of agenda. She's said numerous times now that she was dreading the idea of that question being asked. But, it did come up and she had to make a decision right then as to how to best answer it.

If I am understanding your point, you are saying that she shouldn't have even tried to compete in the Miss USA pageant simply because there was a chance that she might have been asked that question?
f that is what you are saying, then I completely disagree with that position. If that was the case, why wouldn't Mr Perez Hilton simply bow out of the position of judge simply because he might encounter the kind of answer he received? Does that sound intelligent?

Instead, why wouldn't it be possible for both parties involved to bring a mature attitude to the table and act responsibly in not only this situation, but any situation they might encounter during the pageant and deal with things like an adult? I'm my view, one did, and one failed. The woman "Manned-up" and the man turned out to be the "dumb bitch".

This isn't a matter of her not using common sense in this case, but a case of Mr Perez acting like a bitch over the matter, along with many in the audience that night. He asked a question, she answered respectfully, and in doing so, was rewarded with one judge who then completely flew off the handle, ignored every other aspect of the competition, and ruined the event due to a personal political and social agenda. When asked if he wanted to retract his foul statements the next day, he said no and revealed that he wanted to use the "C___" word instead of "dumb bitch" to describe her.

Mr Hilton's complete lack of tolerance in this matter shows a distinct lack of character and sets back the progress made by the homosexual community in terms of acceptance and awareness over that past decade or so. They have made great strides over the past few years but his actions and words show that some of them still have a ways to go in terms of tolerance for the hetero-sexual and religious communities. When even the leaders of your own movement denounce your actions, you know you have reached Fail status.

Perez Hilton is the yzf-r1 of the homosexual community. He might have conviction in his beliefs, but his shotgun to the face delivery and emotional immaturity wins no one over to his cause, and can actually set back the cause to the point of detraction.

(Sorry Mark. I know you are probably reading this but please don't take that last part personal. No offense to you but I had to come up with a powerful and familiar reference that some people on this board would recognize to illustrate my point.....)

I'm not saying she shouldn't have tried, I'm just saying you can't expect to win if you're going to offend a hell of a lot of people watching the competition. I'm glad she answered truthfully, and I'm glad she stuck by her beliefs. I'm even pleased that when she answered, she made it clear that it was solely based on her ideals and how she was raised. HOWEVER, she could have answered in a very mutual response that both showed how seriously she took her beliefs, but also showed her compassion that she honestly seemed to have.

What Perez Hilton did was ridiculous and extremely immature. Unfortunately, he's just reinforcing any negative perspective already held on the homosexual community. Anyone who reacts in that manner, gay or straight, is nothing short of juvenile.

And as for the church thing, I got that you were just trying to make a point. lol. I mean, I might do it some day, but I'll make sure to run my ass off right after.

Meh, I'll just contend that she actually did answer in a way that showed her beliefs in the issue, and also did it in a way as to not be offensive to those that were inclined to believe in a different way, which she knew to be in the audience.
I still fail to see how her answer could have been taken out of context or in any way taken as offensive, even to the person she was answering. I guess if he didn't want the truth, he shouldn't have asked.

I'll even go so far as to speculate that Mr Hilton, with extensive knowledge of her profile which each contestant must furnish, knew of her background and beliefs and asked the loaded question on purpose. But again, that's just speculation on my part and I have no way to confirm it.

Oh, and when you do the Great Church Run, let me know, I want to see that shit lol.

Oh, he probably did check it out.

And when I do the run, I'll be sure to let you know. Hell, I'll ppv it. lol

I just don't think you're using common sense when you jump into a competition expecting to win while basically blasting the main audience. There's no point to even try then.

I honestly heard more applause than booing. CA voted DOWN gay marriage...hmmm, who is truly being offended? but no cares of Christians are offended in these last days

and btw, no one would boo a guest for speaking (favorably) about homosexual "marriage" (a true oxy-moron) in my church, but they wouldn't ask you to become a member, either

Oh, he probably did check it out.

And when I do the run, I'll be sure to let you know. Hell, I'll ppv it. lol

No ppv....I want freebies. It was, after all, my idea :)

Carrie Prejean says she thinks Biblically, but that kids should "stay true to themselves" (a somewhat trite/canned statement)...perhaps a contradiction?

meh, I didn't get that impression. I took it to mean that she was encouraging kids who thought like her to stay true to their beliefs, this staying true to themselves.

ok, and I think that's what she meant, but from a Biblical standpoint, it's staying true to God's authority and Biblical authority, not anything within yourself, because as even as the apostle Paul says, "I find nothing good lives in me"

on a side note, definitely one of the most gorgeous women walking the planet, I saw her on CNN again today, she is getting a ton of press (and likely $$) from this

So far she is using the publicity to spread a message of faith in God and to help others be strong in the face of adversity. Hopefully she can be an encouragement to others on a continual basis and not be corrupted by the fame.

agreed...