Gay Marriage Sinks Miss California's shot at Crown

[injest]

No one made her get up on a stage and try to be Miss USA.  The judges ask these kinds of questions.  This is not unusual, not unexpected and gay marriage is a pertinent topic.  Her PR people might have educated her a bit better, but perhaps she didn't want to be educated.

or perhaps she has enough character to not lie to get ahead...an unpopular concept I know.

she did NOT do anything wrong..period. She was asked her opinion and she gave it.

[brokeplex]

I think what a lot of us are forgetting here with Miss CA....is the fact that she was forced to state her opinion on same sex marriage, if front of millions of people.

that is correct, and Mr Lavandeira used this "poisoned pill" as an excuse to mark her score in that category down to zero, ensuring that Ms Prejean would not be Miss USA.

who put him up to it?

and what were their motivations?

[oilgun]

OMG, a dozen pages of posts about that born-again bimbo?  I'm off to bed, pronto! 

[injest]

OMG, a dozen pages of posts about that born-again bimbo?  I'm off to bed, pronto! 

kinda says it all doesn't it, Brokeplex?

[brokeplex]

kinda says it all doesn't it, Brokeplex?

or maybe it says very little?

[injest]

or maybe it says very little?

I wonder if some in the gay community don't WANT to get past the homophobia...what would they blame for all their problems if they have no one to point to? I mean, right now they can blame their problems on the mean Christians that wont' let them get married (although as Brad points out, few HAVE partners to get married to...) 

they continually shoot themselves in the foot....and then scream it is everyone elses fault...until they see the beam in their own eye, they'll never get that mote out of the Christians eyes..

and I am not talking about anyone here, I am talking about the protesters in California.

[brokeplex]

I wonder if some in the gay community don't WANT to get past the homophobia...what would they blame for all their problems if they have no one to point to? I mean, right now they can blame their problems on the mean Christians that wont' let them get married (although as Brad points out, few HAVE partners to get married to...) 

they continually shoot themselves in the foot....and then scream it is everyone elses fault...until they see the beam in their own eye, they'll never get that mote out of the Christians eyes..

and I am not talking about anyone here, I am talking about the protesters in California.

interesting question, but I sincerely believe that by overwhelming margins, gays just want to live their lives in peace and prosperity with a minimal amount of interference from the government, churches, neighbors, community leaders or activists.

there is that so called SMOG vote / opinion that no one seems be able to get a handle on.

SMOG - silent majority of gays

[injest]

interesting question, but I sincerely believe that by overwhelming margins, gays just want to live their lives in peace and prosperity with a minimal amount of interference from the government, churches, neighbors, community leaders or activists.

there is that so called SMOG vote / opinion that no one seems be able to get a handle on.

SMOG - silent majority of gays

that's what I said..SOME in the community...

[Lynne]

I wonder if some in the gay community don't WANT to get past the homophobia...what would they blame for all their problems if they have no one to point to? I mean, right now they can blame their problems on the mean Christians that wont' let them get married (although as Brad points out, few HAVE partners to get married to...) 

they continually shoot themselves in the foot....and then scream it is everyone elses fault...until they see the beam in their own eye, they'll never get that mote out of the Christians eyes..

and I am not talking about anyone here, I am talking about the protesters in California.

Well, as usual, I don't agree.  In my opinion, even if not one single gay person actually wanted to get married, it's still wrong (again IMO) from a legal standpoint to discriminate based on sexual orientation...whether we're talking about marriage rights or any other.  The right should be there, period.  Take advantage of it (or not) at your own discretion.

This argument is analogous (again, and growing tiresome) to freeing the slaves during the Civil War Era.  Do you think most slaves wanted to be free?  Many/most could not conceive of any other way of life; most were illiterate.  Who would take care of them?  How would they earn a living?  They knew no other life but one of slavery.  A few had the imagination, and likely some education, to dream of a life of freedom, but that was a minority, I am confident.

So should we just have continued keeping other human beings as property?  I think not.  It was a long hard road for everyone, particularly the newly freed slaves, and we're not even finished with it yet because minorities only enjoy full civil rights in name only in many parts of this country.

Still, it was worth doing.  Wasn't it?  I think so.

[injest]

Well, as usual, I don't agree.  In my opinion, even if not one single gay person actually wanted to get married, it's still wrong (again IMO) from a legal standpoint to discriminate based on sexual orientation...whether we're talking about marriage rights or any other.  The right should be there, period.  Take advantage of it (or not) at your own discretion.

This argument is analogous (again, and growing tiresome) to freeing the slaves during the Civil War Era.  Do you think most slaves wanted to be free?  Many/most could not conceive of any other way of life; most were illiterate.  Who would take care of them?  How would they earn a living?  They knew no other life but one of slavery.  A few had the imagination, and likely some education, to dream of a life of freedom, but that was a minority, I am confident.

So should we just have continued keeping other human beings as property?  I think not.  It was a long hard road for everyone, particularly the newly freed slaves, and we're not even finished with it yet because minorities only enjoy full civil rights in name only in many parts of this country.

Still, it was worth doing.  Wasn't it?  I think so.

I reject the notion that Prop 8 is equal to oking slavery. Sorry. it is an invalid arguement to me.