Miss California Really Did Win

I have never been a huge fan of beauty pageants and it has nothing to do with the judging on evening gowns and swimsuits because contestants enter the pageant at their own free will knowing what the criteria is.  While I am all for young women setting a goal and working to achieve it, I just never liked the idea of a select group of people determining who is the winner and who are the losers and the contestants trying to please them.

During the Miss USA Pageant last night, Miss California changed all of that for me.  It’s obvious that Carrie Prejean had no intention of gaining brownie points with openly gay gossip blogger Perez Hilton (why is a gossip blogger important enough to be a judge anyway?) when he asked her if she believed that more states should allow same-sex marriage.

Here is her response……

Notice that her response is pretty tame and stems from her opinions and how she was raised (she even stumbles with her answer a bit).  She is not reflecting anybody else’s views but her own, but like I have said many times before, gay marriage will lead to the squelching of freedom of religion and freedom of speech.  This is grossly apparent in the response to Ms. Prejean’s answer from the Miss California spokesperson.

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,” said Lewis in a statement. “I believe all religions should be able to ordain what unions they see fit. I do not believe our government should be able to discriminate against anyone and religious beliefs have no politics in the Miss California family.

It looks like Miss California is being discriminated against because her views are being seen as discriminatory (makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it).  Also, Perez admitted that she lost the Miss USA title because of her answer when he stated “Miss USA should represent everyone. Her answer alienated millions of gay and lesbian Americans, their families and their supporters.”  What if the first runner-up admitted in her answer that she was openly gay and supports same-sex marriage, and the reason given that she didn’t win was because “Miss USA should represent everyone.  Her answer allientated millions of Christians, those Americans who voted for traditional marriage, their families and their supporters.”   There would have been riots in the streets of Las Vegas with that answer by those who embody “tolerance” and perhaps a night in jail for a hate crime for the person who spoke it.

Did her response cost her the crown?  You bet it did.  Did she come out more of a winner by losing?  You better believe it.  Because of Carrie Prejean’s ability to stand-up for what she believes she will have more face time in the media and speaking engagements than the winner will.  By they way, who did win??????

Tradition isn’t right because it is long-standing.  Some traditions are long-standing because they are right.

Advertisements

21 comments so far

  1. QuoVadisAnima on

    Well said! Well said! *clapping*

  2. mike on

    Absolutely!
    This young woman stood up, spoke clearly and strongly, and made her point well.
    She was clearly the best contestant.
    And, because she is a Christian attending a Christian college in San Diego, CA, she was set up by the revolting non-entity doofus who calls himself Perez Hilton.
    This was nothing more than a hatchet job and done by street trash.

    Where’s Bert?
    It would be much better with him.
    And I never liked Bert much, don’t watch beauty contests and am not even a practicing Christian.
    But I am an American and this was wrong!

  3. Lisa on

    The problem is that what she is doing is EXCLUDING people that do not share her views. DENYING their rights. If an openly gay pagent queen (is there such a thing lol) came out in favor of same-sex marriage, they are not EXCLUDING straight people from getting married. Hello??? The argument makes no sense, and hiding behind religion makes no sense in the gay marriage agenda. Nobody is saying religions can’t make their own policies, and people can’t believe in what they were raised to believe in. The Amish have every right to live without electricity and condemn those members who do not comply. The LAW should not take any religions side though.

  4. David on

    Lisa, if the law should not take religion’s side, let’s stop calling it marriage. Let all civil marriages hereby be called civil UNIONs. Marriage is, by definition, a religious act-a bond between a man and a woman, unbreakable except by God.

    Amen to the blogger!

  5. Robert the Lutheran on

    Miss Prejean did in fact win her crown – and in a profound way, it shined even more brilliantly than any tiara sought in this contest. She triumphed not only on the matter of her personal belief on marriage but also seized a victory for the majority of Americans who feel the same way. For me, Miss Prejean offers some hope that our society will not completely surrender its values to the point that perversion and degeneracy are rewarded instead.

  6. Jersey on

    Well said, Robert the Lutheran! I just wrote to a friend re: this topic stating that I am both infuriated and exhilarated at the same time. God bless this courageous young woman!

  7. Lisa on

    Of course, if straight marriages would be referred to, under all legal / government references, as “Civil Unions”, then, of course, this would also be equal.

    Does anyone actually have an argument that makes sense?

  8. Diane on

    When will ALL AMERICANS be considered equal? When do we ALL get the same rights as each other? Land of the free? Sure, unless your gay or lesbian, then you are not. Hey if I’m not considered an equal member of this country, then hey why should I have to pay taxes…..that’s fair, right? I should have to pay for this country if I am not given the same and fair rights as others…….

  9. Lisa on

    Thank you Diane, that DOES make sense.

  10. David on

    My point, exactly, Lisa. Civil marriage is not marriage at all. It’s a civilly recognized UNION. Whether it’s hetero or gay is not an issue (to me). Marriage is a religious union, in many faiths it is much deeper than a civil union. So call it what you will, what the state issues is not a marriage.

    Diane, hear, hear! When WILL ALL Americans, including those in the womb, be considered equal and have the same rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness???

    Look, I’m Catholic and we don’t consider same-sex unions as marriages, but in reality, many marriages are just legal mumbo-jumbo. Marriage in Catholic terms is much deeper than that. This is why we object. We actually embrace (or are supposed to embrace) our brothers and sisters who have same-sex attraction. And you deserve equal dignity and respect. Just understand there’s a principle here as to what a marriage is.

  11. Robert the Lutheran on

    I think we sometimes confuse equality with fairness. Unfortunately, the gay mafia would have us all believe that by defending the definition of heterosexual marriage, the oldest of sanctified and sacred traditions in the history of mankind, that we somehow exclude or subordinate those in society who deviate by nature or by moral code. I have not heard of any civil union in our country that denies a SSM couple of any of the civil rights, monetary benefits, or “human” equality that are preserved in a traditional marriage. The whole inequality issue is a false argument. Proponents of SSM would have you believe that it is morally equivalent and that by labeling it as marriage means that we will somehow eliminate the issue of inequality (and our moral, non-acceptance of homosexuality). Marriage and civil unions are equal at the secular, societal level but are very different in terms of biblical context and tradition. Whereas race and ethnicity are not matters of choice, meaning that all humans are fundamentally equal despite these differences, our choice of what gender we join with is not the same. It does deserve, however, separate but equal treatment. Convention, tradition, and biblical teaching have long established that marriage is, by definition, man and woman. What you wish to call the alternative, legally or otherwise, should not infringe on upon this or force me and the rest of the moral majority to accept as something similar. What may surprise many detractors to this argument is that Christians do in fact respect, love, and accept homosexual people as any other – mainly because we see that man is more than his preferences, deserving the same dignity as any other. It is unfortunate that advocates of SSM who decry our preservation of tradition as discrimination and inequality do not necessarily reciprocate the same benevolence.

  12. Robert the Lutheran on

    Quick points:

    1. While true issues of equality transcend man-made laws, you cannot legislate, however, the legal acceptance for minority viewpoints and fringe behavior! Anyone who thinks otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

    2. If we have the same house, mine painted red, please don’t insist that I change the name of the color just because you paint yours blue!

    3. I accept the majority of society deciding and defining what is the norm, the accepted, and the “right” – this is how organized civilizations have survived for eons!

  13. Robert the Lutheran on

    I dare you to find one public water fountain, bus, bathroom, school or movie theater in American society that segregates or differentiates its customers by who they share their life with! Until this happens, you can never claim that protection of the term “marriage” for only heterosexual couples is somehow discriminatory, homophobic, disparate, or unequal for all members of society!

  14. Robert the Lutheran on

    The pageant judges, Hilton especially, were discriminatory and unfair in their questions! Unless they challenged all the other contestants to the same exact question posed to Miss Prejean, and same post-contest scrutiny and bashing, they subjected Prejean to an entirely different standard – likely only to create spectacle and sensation from knowing that she is Christian! (Oooh!!!..scarey monsters here!) Where then is the media outcry and disdain for unequal treatment of Miss Prejean? Where’s the ACLU? (((echo))) I thought they were champions for equality and fairness.

  15. David on

    Robert, I blogged one of your comments because you make some very valid points…the one that starts out about fairness and equality. TYVM

  16. moitup2u on

    Personally i think she knew what she was doing- smart thinking on her part. Definitely controversial and definitely more face time. And I truly do not think anyone could be so ignorant to think if they gave that “politically incorrect” answer that they would win such a tight butt crown.

    I do however disagree-I dont think she won a thing except for the crown of the most ignorant comment on tv all week. i wish there had been a follow up question….like why?

    its not about a man and a woman…what about the gay family that are not married, adopt a child, buy a house and love each other for years. The partner passes and then their selfish family comes in and steals everything out from under him or her because they had no rights to their spouses house, bank account or life they shared together while loving and caring for each other for years.

    These are topics that need to be discussed with lil miss ignorant up there. id love to hear her response to that.

  17. MRR on

    moitup2u

    What about anyone who chooses destructive behavior and loses everything because of it? The same tragedy of everything being ruined and taken from someone can be applied to those who choose a life a crime or drug addiction for example. Families are destroyed, material goods lost, many broken lives. Do we need to give all behaviors free pass because of the fallout from the reprucussions?

  18. moitup2u on

    Being gay is not choosing a life of destruction or relatable to choosing a life of crime and i personally think it is actually horrible for someone to think that way.

    What would you do if you woke up and you child was gay? Many people dont know that this has been going on for years-very much behind closed doors or “in the closet” so not to offend but it is quite quite possible that maybe your great grandmother had a same sex lover at one point. Yes gross to think of gmas like that but sorry to burst your bbubble. it is about sexual attraction.

    What you are saying is that its comparable to a crime when that is such the wrong train of thought- thats like saying dating a white woman for a black man is comparable to a crime, or a German to date a Jew is comparable to crime. Should repercussions come with those also? Because unfortunately with your train of thought thats the precedent you are setting.

  19. MRR on

    Not sure what bubble your bursting. The homosexual lifestyle is a choice. Maybe that is why you refer to it as waking up one day and someone you knew suddenly was gay. As far as my child choosing to be gay; I would treat it like any other bad or sinful choice. Pray and hate the sin and not the sinner.

    Ummm……and your whole argument that thinking gay marriage is wrong is the same as being against a black/white relationship or a German/Jew relationship is ridiculous. Is it between one man and one woman or not? That’s the argument. Not who the men or women are. Nice try.

    And if it really is about “sexual attraction” then if homosexuals are allowed to marry so should polygamists, pedafiles, and those engaging in incest.

  20. Robert the Lutheran on

    By saying that people are born with genetically predetermined sexual orientation (gay or straight) we also condemn humans to being born criminal, or to any of the other numerous deviant psychosocial tendencies that are counterproductive to human society. By asserting this baseless genetic argument, gay advocates attack heterosexual Christians as bigoted, unfair, cruel, insensitive, divisive, and hateful. Of course, if we attribute sexual orientation to predetermined biological forces, in the same way we attribute right-handedness, eye color, and such, we should hold sexual deviance as blameless as criminal behavior and then grant its practitioner equal acceptance for the institution we call marriage. – Wrong –

    Nineteenth Century Italian criminologist, Cesare Lombroso, attempted to conclude that criminality was inherited, that some people are born criminal. However, more contemporary schools of criminology have come to realize that deviant behavior isn’t entirely a genetic thing. In January 2009, the American Psychiatric Association expressed the following with regard to origins of sexual orientation, finding that orientation cannot be entirely explained by biology or genetics:

    “There are numerous theories about the origins of a person’s sexual orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality. In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many reasons for a person’s sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people.”

    Once we remove the fallacious “born gay” argument, we must then address the behavior in its proper context – a choice to engage in deviant behavior that contradicts social convention as well as the timeless covenant of marriage between man and women under God. Yes, I think that homosexuality, as a lifelong choice, is destructive. For one, it certainly does not guarantee that its practitioners will perpetuate man as a species. Second, and while subject to even more controversy, same sex couples are incapable of modeling proper male-female role identity with regard to the development of children. Ah yes, liberal lunacy will also cry that same sex couples can raise normal, well adjusted kids – but these are the same people who will attempt to convince the mainstream that the only differences between men and women are their genitalia – wrong again! Since men and women are wired differently, they expose children to wide range of complimentary nurturing that no same sex couple could ever hope to provide.

    Finally, God proscribes what is acceptable and proper – too many biblical verses to cite here, however. I plead with the rest of mainstream society not to yield to false arguments, especially the biological scapegoat that opens the door to “anything goes” in society.

  21. corvedacosta on

    I love Carrie Prejean and I just wrote an article on her. Its a hot topic.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: