Homophobic idiot sore loser at Miss USA pageant

what does it matter, it's her view point so be it. Just because you don't agree with what she had to say, does not make her wrong.

Sure, she has every right to her oppinion, but a C-note sais FOX NEWS jumps all over this as further evidence of how the "EEEEEEEEVIL libruls done stoled R Country!"

And she's a dumb fuck for voicing that statement in this pagent.

The Miss USA pagent is still, a beauty pagent. I wouldn't have had the gals in the pagent answer questions about the bailout, or on same sex marriage. I was happy to see Miss California say what she feels about gay marriage and not answer the question in a more politaically correct way just to win. Even though she came in second, she could always get a job at Fox News.

Actually, it totally does.

But, Perez Hilton can go around misquoting people about the event and saying that people said shit when they didn't.

It's a nice double standard.

EDIT: To say I'm referring to the NBC/MISS USA producer he quoted at his site that later refuted ever speaking to Hilton. Miss California still made an ass out of herself and there's no defending that. It's just that if we're going to fault idiots in the matter, the light should be shone on both parties.

No she's not. Her belief is narrow-minded, but I'm happy that she at least stated it plainly and isn't trying to bullshit her way out of it. You're giving that answer to Perez Hilton -- she's not dumb enough (or her management isn't dumb enough) that she didn't know who she was talking to.

Jesus H. Christ. Why do people insistently cling to this notion that every opinion is valid? She is WRONG. It was WRONG to have different drinking taps for blacks and whites last century. It was RIGHT to oppose that. It is WRONG to discriminate against people over their sexual preference. It is RIGHT to afford people equal rights.

Do you fucking get it? It is not a matter of opinion.

It is a matter of opinion. It doesn't matter if she's wrong (and she is) or not, they asked her opinion on gay marriage and she answered honestly. It was a stupid fucking question in the first place and unfairly skews perceptions. I don't think such volatile issues should be allowed near fluff such as this.

I actually admire the ignorant dolt for standing by her beliefs and not hem-hawing around the answer.

The question is also stupid for giving the right wingers more ammo to use against "librul 'Merica". This is one of those fucking fuck fuck things that infuriate me because it adds absolutely nothing to the legitimate dialog on the subject and only provides a distraction.

I would bang the intolerance right out of her. My cock makes the world a better place.

These chicks are retards anyways. It's not as if she came up with that answer. Did you hear the other finalist? When asked if she was for universal health care for Americans she refused to answer because she said it's a matter of integrity and it's not her place to comment on it. And she was the winner.

At the very least it's good to keep the dialogue going. This flimsy "between a man and a woman" arguement seems to lose steam every time it gets trotted out as the end all and be all.

Maybe she'll end up being Sarah Palin's running mate!

She may be wrong, but people are allowed to be wrong. I admire her (as much as I can admire a pageant competitor) for representing her actual beliefs.

Fighting against gay marriage is a losing battle, it's coming eventually.

P.S. I just met a member of one of the first gay couples to get legally divorced in SF. Seems just as miserable to go through as regular ol' hetero divorce.

I love that people are like 'Hey, it's her actual beliefs, good for her!'

What if her actual belief was 'Niggers are animals and ending slavery was a mistake'? Should we applaud her bravely standing by that?

If you're against gay marriage you're a bad person. Just like you were a bad person if you were against the abolition of slavery, intermarriage of the races or the Civil Rights movement. Let's stop pretending otherwise. And these bad people should be ridiculed and crushed so that we as a people can continue with the important business of PROGRESSING.

Oh non-existant christ I love it when they say "That's how I was raised" to justify anything, thereby obliterating any possible thought process. I wouldn't be surprised if she's never traveled anywhere before her pageant.

Does this mean I have to like her music now?

"My daddy was a verbally abusive alcoholic and Momma was a rabid Bible-thumping douchebag, but they raised me with MORALS, goddam...gosh darn it!"

Yes. Sorry, but that's how it goes.

You're right, but a wrong opinion is still an opinion. People went to see 17 Again and had the opinion that it was a good movie. That's their opinion even though that makes them suspect.

The reason I'm impressed that the woman answered in such a straight forward fashion is because she had to know that it was a polarizing question and would greatly diminish her chances to win the "competition". Especially considering that, for these women, winning really is everything.

She publicly voiced her intolerance and stupidity in a public fashion without any stupid qualifiers like "some of my best friends are gay". Throwing out your hopes and dreams, no matter how vapid, to champion an opinion that is backwards and evil takes a level of commitment that most people don't have.

Trust me, I am in full support of the gay rights movement and it is embarrassing that this is as far as we've come in my lifetime. However, the fact that most people get their information on the subject from sources such as the fucking Miss America Pageant and Perez Hilton pisses me off.

It is a distraction from the actual progression of the issue.

ETA: I take that back, "I was raised that way" is a pretty big qualifier on par with "Some of my best friends are...."

The fact remains that she is wrong, ignorant, and evil. But I'll be damned if she didn't throw what is possibly her lifelong dream away to prove it.

That's a sickening example; you're comparing the infringement on one's human rights to enjoying or not enjoying a Zac Efron movie. I am not trying to repress Zac Efron from doing whatever he does in his personal life by not seeing his movie. You're arguing art appreciation against...argh, that is asinine.

EDIT: I think you're just mixed up, though.

EDIT#2: You can argue the finer or worse points of 17 Again, but there is no basis for hating gays, except prejudice, for not allowing gay marriage. I can't believe I'm arguing this...

Right, but I don't see what's praiseworthy about that. I don't really give a fuck about people being very straightforward with their hatred, because I've heard a lot worse in my lifetime (and I'm sure you have too), and I still can't say that being open about your dumbassery regardless of the consequences is something that someone deserves even the slightest bit of recognition for. On one hand, sure, it makes it easier for me to know who is an absolute fuckwad and who isn't, but on the other hand their diarrhea of the mouth is going to get praised by some other dolt for "telling it like it is" (I'M LOOKING AT YOU FOX NEWS), and that's going to spur them on to be even more of a loudmouth piece of shit than they were before.

She's a genius, did she come up with the term "opposite marriage" all by herself?

It's like some of you don't even remember what Dennis wrote on the post card at the end of Observe And Report.

If there is value here, it's not because she had an opinion but because she shared it unapologetically and without equivocation. That's better than trying to weasel around the argument, at least. The opinion itself is fucked.

Not praiseworthy at all, but pretty damn amazing that people will stick with their stupidity in the face of public scorn and being on the wrong side of history.

She could have easily given a non-answer such as "that is a topic that is very personal to a lot of people", but no, she went whole hog and went the "gays are not real people and do not deserve to be treated as such" route.

I'm not saying "good for her", but I am honestly amazed that she gave the answer she did.

And yes, I guarandamntee that Fox news and the Right wing media are going to adopt this woman as their next spokesperson. Hasslebeck, watch out!

Again, if that opinion was 'The Holocaust never happened,' would you think there was some 'value' there?

Yeah, there's a shred of value in at least stating your belief rather than hiding it, especially if you know it's wrong. (Or, in your mind, 'unpopular.)

It's not the value of the opinion, but the honesty with which it's expressed. Two different things.

Heh. "Opposite marriage."

Anyway, Swice has a point - it takes integrity of a sort to answer that question honestly given the context. Without privilege, stupidity and hatred don't really carry much cachet; oddly enough, in this particular position, she had more to lose than win by expressing her true feelings on the subject (unless you interpret this in the larger framework of Fox making her a cause celebre).

But the fact that she had to answer the question points to a strategic puzzler. As I understand it, the contestants could pick the person to question them. If you know that your feelings on homosexuality might seem controversial, why pick the gay guy to pose the question? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

That's hardly an apples to apples comparison anyways.

It's crazy. Crazy like a Fox News Reporter Hopeful!

"Value" - I wish people would wear their controversial/backwards/wrong opinions on their shirts. Big time-saver.

Yeah. I would rather she change her mind about the whole thing, but until that happens, we all (even the wrong ones) might as well be honest, be consistent, and expose our beliefs to the harsh light of day.

edit: We should do that when asked - not go blabbing on a pet issue all the time. If she wanted to receive the question so that she could make a fuss, that's no good. And what FOX does with her story won't be good, etc.

I don't think she picked the judge. I thought it was randomly chosen for her.

I was thinking, maybe "opposite marriage" means divorce? I'm fascinated by the term.

But she stated an opinion, not fact. People can go around saying what ever crazy shit they want, it doesn't mean it's fact. I don't agree with what she said, but I give her credit for stating what she believes in. It's not like she's out preaching hate or violence.

You may be right. I read that in a less-than-reliable resource; the youtube clip makes it look more random.

Even if she were pro-gay marriage, I'd like to think she'd lose the contest specifically because that was the best term she could come up with on the spur of the moment.

re:MoonBaseNick

With facts, it's a simpler argument. The Holocaust happened, therefore she's incorrect. Wrong. Mistaken. No need for discussion of morals, values, philosophies.

With gay marriage, I'm perfectly comfortable saying that she is definitely wrong, but it's a different kind of wrong.

Denying people equal protection under the law IS HATE. SHE IS PREACHING HATE.

Saying that marriage should be between a man and a woman is hate in my eyes, and in the eyes of a lot of other people. Sure, she's not calling them names, but she might as well.

Yeah, she's preaching hate.

What? She's advocating discrimination based on a person's sexuality.

(Shit, the post is like 5 minutes late.)

I'll retract what I said about the hate, I was going from the violence stand point and failed to look at it from a different point of view.

Do you even have a vague concept of what discrimination is? Seriously?

Edited - ah, I see you do. There's hope.

One thing that hasn't really been mentioned here: with her being honest, we've gotten the best of all possible scenarios. Starting with the assumption that she doesn't like the idea of gay marriage, we've got four basic possibilities:

She lies about it and wins.
She lies about it and loses for some other reason.
She tells the truth and wins, showing that the judges don't care that she's a bigot. This would be the worst case, IMO.
She tells the truth and loses because she's identified herself as a bigot.

It's kind of great that she lost this contest, at least partially on the basis of being a bigot. It demonstrates some progress in acknowledging that the beliefs of people like her are getting less of a pass in mainstream culture. She can complain about it all she wants, but it makes her position seem even weaker than it already is.

I totally agree, but gay marriage opponents are going to milk the living FUCK out of this.

Ha ha thanks for the edit, I was just about to get all Perez Hilton on ya.

I agree with Dave, it is great she lost, and from this, one can only hope that she wakes the hell up.

I hope that the Miss USA sponsors/judges/whoever just cop to the fact that it was exactly the reason she lost instead of trying to pass it off as something else. That would give the gay marriage opponents less ammo, I'd say.

After all, there's an inherent integrity in being honest. If the gay marriage opponents get to say that she was punished for being honest, the Miss USA reps should say, "You're damn right she was. End of argument. We're not going to lie about this."

Huh.

More mainstream press for Perez Hilton = Everyone Loses.

Wait ... wait, wait. She said she believed in the "right to chose" (I think those were her words) between same sex marriage and "opposite marriage". She said that for her, marriage was between a man and a woman, yet in a way upheld the right to not restrict marriage.

I'm not sure I would say she's "preaching hatred" here. Why is nobody then complaining about Hilton's proposed answer, that she should have said "it is up to the states". She didn't say that, she said that everybody should have the right to it even though her definition was different.

I'm going off from the brief YouTube clip I saw from her and Hilton's reaction (in Larry King and his blog). Don't know about any other statements outside of that.