The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
Gay Marriage Sinks Miss California's shot at Crown
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: delalluvia on April 30, 2009, 10:49:56 pm ---What Louise said. She's quoted in what she plans to do.
Sorry Bill but her belief that marriage is between a man and woman only in her "country" in her earlier statement is now pretty obviously a Freudian slip. She doesn't suddenly decide to go national in her beliefs, if they're just deep and personal beliefs for her and her little circle and she's "glad everyone else has choice". She's obviously not glad "everyone else has choice". That was obviously political talk while she was trying to win a crown. Competition's over. In fact she doesn't believe what she said, so much so, she's going to do her level best to end the choice for gay people. Just like Mel Gibson's drunken anti-Semitic rants. These don't just suddenly appear out of nowhere.
You can keep giving her the benefit of the doubt if you wish, but just as Gary predicted in his post, sooner or later the leopard shows her spots.
--- End quote ---
you can make all the assumptions you wish about "Freudian slips", and those are clever but not relevant to the topic of what Prejean actually said.
The only relevant point concerning her treatment by Lavandeira was -
1) did she make a bigoted comment that deserved a markdown on her score to ZERO by Lavandeira? and
2) did she make a comment that in civil discourse deserved the slanderous misogynistic comments that Lavandeira made afterward?
I happen to believe that Lavandeira was unfair to Ms Prejean, regardless of her private views, her memberships in Full Gospel Charismatic churches, her affiliation with Pro Family organization (read: pro hetero family organizations), and regardless of the fact that Lavandeira and I happen agree on same sex marriage.
Prejean was made a target and Lavandeira was given a pass for his crude remarks and abuse of power as a judge because Prejean is a conservative hetero female who vocally supported hetero marriage. Prejean's profile put her on the censorship / attack list by the PC left. And that type of censorship cheapens the entire society regardless of political belief or sexual identity.
brokeplex:
--- Quote from: injest on April 30, 2009, 11:11:36 pm --- :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
woo boy...its always something isn't it? there aren't enough 'victim' groups already?
how about 'ruralphobe'?? for those that hate rural people...'christianphobe' for those that hate Christians...heck we could tack "Phobe" on anything and call it a new victim group..
--- End quote ---
:laugh:
delalluvia:
--- Quote from: brokeplex on April 30, 2009, 11:32:45 pm ---you can make all the assumptions you wish about "Freudian slips", and those are clever but not relevant to the topic of what Prejean actually said.
--- End quote ---
I think they are extremely relevant and the whole point of this discussion.
--- Quote ---The only relevant point concerning her treatment by Lavandeira was -
1) did she make a bigoted comment that deserved a markdown on her score to ZERO by Lavandeira? and
--- End quote ---
I think you already know the answer to this. Being a bigot is not something anyone - those judges - wanted as a trait of a Miss "USA".
--- Quote ---2) did she make a comment that in civil discourse deserved the slanderous misogynistic comments that Lavandeira made afterward?
--- End quote ---
In civil discourse? Sure, why not? She's a bigot. She was certainly proud to parade that around and even though she said it really really nicely. Some people are more interested in what someone says, not how they say it. So some people can get very angry at bigots and slander them afterwards.
--- Quote ---I happen to believe that Lavandeira was unfair to Ms Prejean, regardless of her private views, her memberships in Full Gospel Charismatic churches, her affiliation with Pro Family organization (read: pro hetero family organizations), and regardless of the fact that Lavandeira and I happen agree on same sex marriage.
--- End quote ---
How so? As Gary said, Perez was the judge and thus in a position to judge - not Miss CA.
--- Quote ---Prejean was made a target
--- End quote ---
She made herself a target. She was on that stage out of pure free will. The question was chosen at random.
If you believe in that sort of thing, it seems the Fates/God/universe conspired to "out" a bigot who was operating under the guise of a pretty, blonde, sweet, young Xtian pageant contestant.
--- Quote ---and Lavandeira was given a pass for his crude remarks and abuse of power as a judge because Prejean is a conservative hetero female who vocally supported hetero marriage. Prejean's profile put her on the censorship / attack list by the PC left. And that type of censorship cheapens the entire society regardless of political belief or sexual identity.
--- End quote ---
I don't believe anyone has given Perez a pass. Most all of us here have expressed a disliking for him and others have criticized his harsh words and tone in his opinion on Miss CA.
I find it very disturbing that it is now considered by some "PC" to criticize a bigot.
I don't think it "PC". I think it should be a requirement to criticize any bigot who believes in taking civil rights away from another person.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: louisev on April 30, 2009, 06:12:38 pm ---Your "POV on effeminacy" is derailing this thread. We've had several very long and torturous debates about it and that isn't the subject of this tread. Everybody who has been here more than a week has gotten a full exposure to it already, please have some consideration for those who don't want to read it again in unrelated threads for the umpteenth time.
--- End quote ---
Again, I was not the progenitor of the discussion on masculinity/effeminacy on this occasion. I simply chimed in according to the manner consistent with my philosophy on the topic. If you are tired of discussing this subject, you have the freedom and ability to move on.
If you don't like the show, change the channel.
Rx
retropian:
--- Quote from: delalluvia on May 01, 2009, 12:21:28 am ---I think they are extremely relevant and the whole point of this discussion.
I think you already know the answer to this. Being a bigot is not something anyone - those judges - wanted as a trait of a Miss "USA".
In civil discourse? Sure, why not? She's a bigot. She was certainly proud to parade that around and even though she said it really really nicely. Some people are more interested in what someone says, not how they say it. So some people can get very angry at bigots and slander them afterwards.
How so? As Gary said, Perez was the judge and thus in a position to judge - not Miss CA.
She made herself a target. She was on that stage out of pure free will. The question was chosen at random.
If you believe in that sort of thing, it seems the Fates/God/universe conspired to "out" a bigot who was operating under the guise of a pretty, blonde, sweet, young Xtian pageant contestant.
I don't believe anyone has given Perez a pass. Most all of us here have expressed a disliking for him and others have criticized his harsh words and tone in his opinion on Miss CA.
I find it very disturbing that it is now considered by some "PC" to criticize a bigot.
I don't think it "PC". I think it should be a requirement to criticize any bigot who believes in taking civil rights away from another person.
--- End quote ---
Thank you! Every point you have made here is valid! The term PC is used by so called conservatives in attempt to silence debate by arrogantly dismissing another's points as invalid. Calling out bigotry is not Politically Correct it is simply Correct. Defending a bigots right to express their bigotry is also correct. Defending bigotry itself is not.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version