Miss California's Controversial Answer to Same-Sex Marriage

// video added April 20, 2009 // 150 comments //
larkjl86
Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was asked during Miss USA 2009 whether or not other states like Vermont should legalize same-sex marriage. According to Perez Hilton she was booed. You can see this youtube clip and judge yourself.
  1. groups:
    News and Politics,   Picked for Current Tonight,   LGBT
  2. tags:
    News and Politics LGBT Gay Rights Civil Rights 8 more

150 comments // Miss California's Controversial Answer to Same-Sex Marriage // Video

  • Hope75
    • 0
      Hope75  
    • Way to go CARRIE!!!! for being so honest and responding the way you did. That question should have never been asked in a contest like that. She stood up for her belief. We live in a country with freedom of speech and that's exactly what she did. Perez as usual criticizing everyone and taking every oportuninty to have a spotlight whenever he can. Boooo to you Perez!!!!!!!

    • 9 months ago
  • gw961
    • 0
      gw961  
    • I saw Miss California, Carrie Prejean on the 11:00 News last night and she was reading from the Bible!! Good girl Carrie! I think Christians should do something to support this young woman's decision to speak the truth! psalm 56:11 in God I trust; I will not be afraid.
      What can man do to me? Who is this perez hilton? he is nothing! Look the Bible clearly states... do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 1 cor 6:9
      Wake up people!! Look Christians care more about sinners than the rest of you...It is like you are all standing in front of an oncoming train..you don't know the train is coming in fact you don't believe in trains..so the world is telling you..go ahead sit on the tracks if you like...but we are telling you get off the tracks!!! Look if you don't take heed to what I am saying it will be worse for you than being on train tracks..you are on a path to eternal torment..eternal!! It does not matter if you believe it or not...read the Bible..ask God to open your eyes to the truth. If what I am saying is true...would you want to know? Ask God to show you...He has written it in His Word.

    • 10 months ago
  • Sportsnutim
    • 0
      Sportsnutim  
    • gw961:

      Thanks for the reply. God shall prevail. I believe everything the Bible says. Have those who thing perverse thought ever hear of Sodom and Gomorrah? It is not just about that it is SIN! God Bless. Sportsnutim

    • 10 months ago
  • captain_insano
  • Sportsnutim
    • 0
      Sportsnutim  
    • Here's my response again. She made an awesome decision and I back her 100%. She felt that marriage should be this way; that's that! If the homosexuals and those that support same sex marriage don't like it cry me a river. : #

    • 10 months ago
  • McCainiac
    • 0
      McCainiac  
    • It seems that the institution of marriage came from religions. The ones that I'm aware of recognize marriage as a holy union between man and woman. Somewhere the government got involved. It probably had something to do with a politician getting paid off. If you're religious you should follow the principals of your religion. Most people are still religious so when it comes to a vote they vote in favour of their religious belief. Majority rules in a democracy. Why is Mr. Perez trying to bully everyone to believe that if you don't share his values than you're a dumb bitch? I think he needs a better arguement if he wants to win votes for his cause. He probably just set the gay marriage movement back twenty years. Who's the bitch now?

    • 10 months ago
  • WordCandy
    • 0
      WordCandy  
    • All she did was answer the question she was asked. Not everyone needs to agree with her answer. I do believe that was the question that did cost her the crown, not because of Perez Hilton's outrage, but because of what Miss USA stands for. Miss USA is (supposed to be) someone who is accepting of everyone. Although she answered with honesty, she alienated an entire demographic of people.

      I don't at all agree with her response but I give her props for her honesty.

    • 10 months ago
  • ColdWorld
    • 0
      ColdWorld  
    • I'm heterosexual, happily married with a son and a daughter and those here who keep pushing this bullS%&t opinion argument kill me. Bigotry will die, because it's wrong. God knows that. That's all the entire "protection" of marriage thing is about. People are afraid that their children will see perfectly normal, happy gay couples together and realize that being gay is not wrong. If either of my kids grow up and realize they are gay I will love them the same. And regardless of their sexual orientation, I will always teach them to treat ALL people with respect regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, class, or any of the other categories that theses bigots use to separate us. Ignorant, stupid, hate-filled people irk me. Religion mis-overstood is poison.

    • 10 months ago
  • ColdWorld
    • 0
      ColdWorld  
    • I believe EQUALITY is what is needed. Well, I think beauty pageants are a crock of S#@t to begin with, but I am very glad that she lost. I don't really like Perez Hilton, but you can't fault him for asking the obviously "loaded" question. Marriage has nothing to do with Christianity ad people used their religion to protect their twisted, bigoted, ideas in this country all the time. These same Christians saw no problem with lynching Black people. The Nazis were Christians. The perpetrators of genocide in Kosovo were Christians killing Muslims. Of course she has a right to her opinion, but it is one derived from a sick belief.

    • 10 months ago
  • titvol
  • ColdWorld
    • 0
      ColdWorld  
    • ColdWorld:

      You must truly be the dumbass. The Klu Klux clan prodigiously roots their beliefs in misconstrued biblical teachings. And yes, the Nazis who killed six million Jews did it in the name of white, Aryan, Christian purity. Look up the facts, ignoramus. Tell my family in South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida that that blacks weren't lynched by these bigots who called themselves Christians. Just because Christians aren't proud of the sick things that have been done in the name of Christianity, does not mean Christians didn't do them. What about the violence in Northern Ireland? Those were protestants and Catholics (both Christian) killing each other. Base your statements on facts next time. You won't look so stupid that way.

    • 10 months ago
  • titvol
    • 0
      titvol  
    • ColdWorld:

      Listen closely clown.....just because these people you speak of did things in the name of religion does NOT make them Christians. These people were NOT followers of Christ regardless of what they professed to be. Get it straight.

    • 10 months ago
  • ColdWorld
    • 0
      ColdWorld  
    • ColdWorld:

      Well, jag off, Christianity is self-defined. i.e. anyone who says/believes they are a Christian, is. All the groups I mentioned (and literally hundreds of others) identified themselves as followers of Christ while committing atrocities . Many of our founding fathers considered themselves to be followers of Christ although they had some foul beliefs. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves even though our country was formed on "Christian" principles. The settlers in the eastern and western US and South America were mostly Christians who thought themselves to be "civilizing savages" as they raped pillaged and stole land from Native Americans. Use facts. You haven't brought up one relevant contemporary or historical fact yet. That's how you can make these ignorant statements. Religion mis-overstood is poison. looks like you're drinking the kool-aid (not to reference another fanatical Christian Leader, Jim Jones)

    • 10 months ago
  • titvol
    • 0
      titvol  
    • ColdWorld:

      Quote me ONE scripture that defines Christianity in a way that backs up what you claim. Just ONE. You can't hold what MAN has done against Jesus Christ. Having said that, who was William Wilberforce?

    • 10 months ago
  • ColdWorld
    • 0
      ColdWorld  
    • ColdWorld:

      Once again, your ignorance is stunning. "Christianity" is not defined in the Bible. The new testament (which is nothing more than an amalgam of writings) just gives descriptions of the teachings of Christ. You won't even find the word "Christian" in the Bible. What we now know as Christianity really did not exist until centuries after Christ. before that, it was just one of many religious cults in ancient Rome. Wilberforce was just one of many Christian abolitionists. You nor I can say whether or not someone in the past was or if someone presently is a Christian. That is purely about that individual's personal relationship with God. My central argument lies with these bigots, then and now, who call themselves Christians. There are many scriptures, if taken literally, that preach hatred. Homosexuality being described as a sin only exists the OLD testament. By DEFINITION Christians follow the rules of the new testament. Forget what book and chapter it's in, but was it not said (in the King James English) "Judge not, lest ye be judged first". All these Christians are doing exactly that when it comes to gay marriage. Only God can judge gay, straight, trans, bi, and whatever other sort of sexual orientation based upon the purity of that individual's heart, which NO MAN can see. According to his teachings, Jesus would tell us to love gay people as they were created by God. You are placing the judgment that is reserved for the Most high to make. ignoramus

    • 10 months ago
  • JohnA
    • 0
      JohnA  
    • The obvious question to me is why is a gay man judging a contest on the beauty of women? He doesn't even like women, who hired him?

    • 10 months ago
  • ColdWorld
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  
    • I heard cheering. Even though Prejean prayed that she not be given this question, God always gives us what we least want so that we may give Him the glory by proving to the world that we do His will, even when it is contrary to our own. It is always hard to do the right thing and always easy to do the wrong, given peer pressure. The reason her peers and mainstream society condemn her is because she was given the platform to legitimize same-sex marriage and to the contrary, she went with against the pressure and they now demonize her for it and wish her the worst. I believe the backlash will be shortlived because others will see her individuality and as they say, "there is no such thing as bad publicity".

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
    • 0
      occono  
    • Kylsport:

      I'm gay and I can tell you right now we don't care. It's being made out like there's some crusade against her. Perez Hilton is the only one acting all childish about it, nobody really cares like it's being made out that we do. I just laughed at "opposite marriage" and moved on.

    • 10 months ago
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  
    • Kylsport:

      So am I, I am homosexual, but do not believe in the homogenization of the lifestyle. I find it ironic, that you claim to 'celebrate diversity', yet it lacks a diversity of thought. Rather than looking inward at one's own interest, examine the impact it would have on society by any attempts to define marriage. It would open the door for anyone to form relationships with anything or anyone, it would clamp down on freedom of speech by jamming what is considered bigotry and open-mindedness. No, I see it for what it really is and for that, I do not fit into your mold of what it means to be gay.

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
    • 0
      occono  
    • Kylsport:

      ...uh...

      .....so you're an advocate for gay promiscuity over monogamy? What on earth do you mean? We shouldn't be able to get married because people won't be able to criticize it? I don't where to begin with that.

    • 10 months ago
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  
    • Kylsport:

      If you got your way and the door was open for polygamy, et. al., you wouldn't have to worry about permiscuity and any perverse form of a relationship. Who's to say the permiscuity would end with marriage. It hasn't with heterosexuals. With my experience, it is far more acceptable in the homosexual lifestyle with open relationships and non-monogamy.

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
    • 0
      occono  
    • Kylsport:

      ...I don't know what your lifestyle is but I don't do anything different with my day then the average straight person. You want to be all promiscuous you go ahead.

    • 10 months ago
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  
    • Kylsport:

      I am so content with my partner, who views on marriage may differ, but understands the reasonings of not implementing such measures. He understands that we already possess such rights that married couples do, through living will and medical power of attorney for hospital visits, estate planning and life insurance designee's. This 'in-your-face' approach to try to force acceptance of redefining marriage will only drive toward more opposition. Even the subtlety attempted by trying to paint the lifestyle as normal as that of a married couple is only a front of what would follow shortly thereafter.

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
  • igordy
    • 0
      igordy [removed]  
    • Kylsport:

      Kylsport - I so agree with you. I am straight - and ... how do I say this without offending anyone and succumbing to the political correctness at the same time - I don't care if you are straight or gay - and frankly, I don't really want to know either. I don't dislike gays - but I dislike queers - does that make sense? The "in your face gay" doesn't really rub me the right way - your statement on that is very much to the point. Anyway - I was reading your interchange with occono - and it shows that we can all be reasonable and rational. I appreciate and support your stance!

    • 10 months ago
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  
    • Kylsport:

      Igordy, I appreciate your open-mindedness. Orinoco, regarding your last comment of oddity, when you considering the source, I take it as a compliment. I have always take real 'pride' in my individuality and when such remarks are made by those who would rather make their decisions on emotion, rather than reason-I would opt out to stick out like a sore thumb.

    • 10 months ago
  • Kylsport
    • 0
      Kylsport  
    • Kylsport:

      And so to end all discussion and draw away from any personal attacks, all attention is drawn to the real issue. But as it has been proven in this thread of discussion, I rest my case. Let the real issue speak for itself and attacks on person be considered trivial.

    • 10 months ago
  • titvol
  • RCS
    • 0
      RCS  
    • She, of course, has every right to her own opinion. However, being from California and knowing that there was a gay judge on this panel, she should have been expecting that a question such as this one could come up.

      If the question had been about interracial marriage, with a black judge being on the panel, and she had answered the same way, not only would that judge not have voted for her, but there would have been media outrage. So, perhaps she should have thought a little more beforehand about what she would say if this topic arose.

      For a good insight as to why gays and lesbians have every reason to be upset and angry over the bigotry and hatred that they are subjected to by certain groups in our society, it would be beneficial to view Inofuiwell's posting on Current of the National Organization for Marriage's vicious video "The Gathering Storm."

      http://current.com/items/89957714_a-rainbow-coalition-of-people-everywhere-are-c...

      I myself posted one of YouTube's responses to that video on Current. These videos actually shed a lot of light on this subject.

      http://current.com/items/89988453_youtube-takes-some-of-the-wind-out-of-anti-gay...

    • 10 months ago
  • commonsense2
    • 0
      commonsense2  
    • what I want to know is what would have been the result if this Hilton guy didn't vote completely AGAINST this girl? Would she have won? I hope she does sue the show.

    • 10 months ago
  • LaMonica109
    • 0
      LaMonica109  
    • I'm sorry...but Perez Hilton is an A$$HOLE. I am firm believer in the rights for same sex marriage... But Miss California was asked the question that asked HER opinion . She is entitled to her beliefs, whether Hilton, or I disagree with her. don't ask a friggin question you may not like the answer too.

      I say to Miss California, you have the RIGHT to your beliefs...but let this be an example of what gay and lesbian people feel like , when you use your beliefs to take something away from them (the right to marry who they love) .It's not right to try to force others to comply with your beliefs.

      To Perez Hilton...you need to understand that becoming what you vilify, by taking this young woman's dream away from her because her beliefs are different then yours doesn't make you better...it makes you worse..because you should already know what that feels like.

    • 10 months ago
  • photochick
    • 0
      photochick  
    • So now they are going to start judging these things by what these little poodles have to say? hysterical! Keep them prancing.......and give them scripts.......that's what happens to the winner when she has to "serve" her year as a beauty queen...... its store openings, civic groups, parades, yada yada,.....and no one comes to hear her speak.....LOL

    • 10 months ago
  • ashcatash
    • 0
      ashcatash  
    • That must have been hard for her. She knew what answer Perez wanted, but she didn't buckle under the pressure. She said what she believed, and she should have won the pageant (she was definately the prettiest too!)

    • 10 months ago
  • TDubs
    • 0
      TDubs  
    • Interesting how this situation and her answer have been twisted. Clearly there was not booing and clearly Perez expected another answer. Amazing! In our land of freedom and opportunity where we hold stead fast to the constitution, The First Amendment (THE FIRST AMENDMENT!) gives us the right to free speech. A pre-cursor to free speech is free thought. Whereas Mr. Hilton exercises this right freely, in thought and action, he does not seem to want to extend that courtesy to others. In my experiences when people speak of being open minded the subtext is, agree with me or I will brand you a hateful person. Clearly, in this instance, Mr. Hilton is the one who is not open minded. To be open minded one must be able to accept that a person, when presented with the same set of facts, may come to a different conclusion and we, as spectators and likewise open minded people, are able to accept that difference simply as that, the differences that create an average. Quite simply, I support the fact that Mel Gibson had a drunken tirade, I do not support the content of his tirade rather his freedom to say it. Too often our differences are washed away by pandering to this concept of a PC mentality; this mentality having been constructed from an 'average' of our individual psyches. Point of fact is that quite often no one is actually 'average' or 'median'. This conceptual data point represents the 'Midway' of our differences. Say it loud and say it proud, only then will we, as a country, be able to appreciate the inclusive agenda that the PC movement hopes to create. It is our differences that make us stronger. It is our differences that give us an average. I applaud you Miss California and am hopeful that viewers everywhere find the courage and ability to speak their mind while being mindful of the common good.

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
    • 0
      occono  
    • TDubs:

      Perez Hilton's ranting aside, who is trying to silence/penalize her for what she said? Are you sure you're not imagining a big outrage that isn't actually there? Most Gay people I've talked to don't care about this at all.

    • 10 months ago
  • akamaial
    • 0
      akamaial [removed]  
    • TDubs:

      To Dubs,. that is the best and most eloquent expression and clarity of thought pertaining to the value of open honest and speech in perspective to PC protocol (which often makes a mockery of it all)...when one is inhibited from honest sincere dialog. (not withstanding social grace) what is left?.......absolutely nothing!

    • 10 months ago
  • Gozy
    • 0
      Gozy  
    • Why can't gay people just deal with other opinions? I am tired of always hearing about how we should just accept their opinion and roll out the special treatment. Candice Nichols said it best, she disagrees but it is her right to say what she feels. Really who cares what celebrities like Perez Hilton think? They are not role models… that are just on TV. If he wants a man’s penis in his body’s waste remove system that is his business. This is what is truly wrong with today’s America. Think for yourself people!

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
  • yvesisaki
    • 0
      yvesisaki  
    • I admire her honesty. I like how there was no boo-ing. I strongly believe this and why should I be ashamed for having such an opinion.

    • 10 months ago
  • ZomBelle
  • Niivalue
    • 0
      Niivalue  
    • @Kwertykus: She wasn't choosing for you, she was stating her own opinion, essentially saying that she wanted to "choose" to marry a man as you so eloquently put it. She even initially stated that she was glad people had the choice to choose, though Perez failed to ever mention that particular part of her answer.

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
    • 0
      occono  
    • Niivalue:

      But the question was whether she supported the legislation of it, not whether she morally supported it. I got the impression she was opposed to it being legalized, not just that she wouldn't be FOR it, if that makes sense.

      Whatever, this thing is so blown out of proportion. I don't care what Religious people think of my life, just give me the right to live it.

    • 10 months ago
  • TxProud
    • 0
      TxProud  
    • Go Carrie, Stand up for whats right. Don't let pressure from these strange groups stop you from believing and doing what is right.

    • 10 months ago
  • marklemagne
  • Kwertykus
    • 0
      Kwertykus  
    • Dear Miss Cali,
      You can go ahead and "choose" to marry a man. However, I'd prefer it if you did not choose for me, and the rest of this country for that matter, who we can marry.

    • 10 months ago
  • Sportsnutim
  • fearlessfosdick
  • commonsense2
    • 0
      commonsense2  
    • He's a jerk. She gave a nervous answer and, no, she didn't answer the question directly but did she not say she liked the freedom we all have to choose what we want? What more do you want? So she doesn't think like you do, Perez. So what? Get over yourself.

    • 10 months ago
  • AmourTerreux
    • 0
      AmourTerreux  
    • She just a lil dense, but she WAS being honest....but next time babygirl, when your standing in front of the gayest man alive, talking about a super hot topic, just say "sure, let everybody get married, yay" and smile :D!!!...that's all you needed to say, and you guys would of been BFF's forever...

    • 10 months ago
  • Hendrix_Is_God
    • 0
      Hendrix_Is_God  
    • I might not agree with what she said, but she can say what ever she wants. Perez (I have no idea who you are by the way) go suck a dick, need to take a chill pill and cut the girl some slack.

    • 10 months ago
  • gen468
    • 0
      gen468  
    • I find it interesting that this young woman was asked a question as to what she thought and believed, and then ridiculed for giving an honest answer.
      America is supposed to be a land of free people, free expression, of diverse religions and beliefs, yet if what you believe does not conform to the current media and Hollywood agenda you are belittled as some sort of religious right wing fanatic.

      It takes true courage in today’s environment to express ones true opinion on moral issues.
      Why it is good to believe gay marriage is ok but bad to believe that it is not ok.
      What someone believes is not good or bad, only actions can create a socially unacceptable or acceptable response.

      Believing that marriage should only be between a man and woman does not make that person wrong or a bad person.
      However if action is taken to discriminate , ridicule or marginalize someone because of what they believe that is wrong and unacceptable.

      For example if this young woman is not chosen as Miss America because of her beliefs, that would be wrong.

    • 10 months ago
  • Niivalue
    • 0
      Niivalue  
    • I think Perez Hilton's reaction to her answer was completely uncalled for, and in his own statement he completely contradicts himself.

      He says that she didn't answer the question correctly, and proceeds to give his version of an "acceptable" answer.

      Yes Miss USA is meant to represent unity, but more than that, she is meant to be a role model for all American girls and women. She spoke true to her heart and her mind and gave an honest opinion; whether that opinion is right or wrong, whether you agree with her or not, the point is: she was honest, and that is exactly what Miss USA is supposed to be.

      I agree, Perez Hilton's answer was a better and more diplomatic one, one that was most likely a much wiser choice. Regardless, the question asked HER what HER opinion was, and she gave it. If what he said is not her opinion, how could you ask her to lie and parrot someone else's thoughts?

      Calling her a "dumb bitch" simply lowers and degrades himself, moreso than debasing her. And in addition, if gay marriage really is an issue left to the states only, why would so many people in California want to overturn Prop 8? It was a state issue, it was voted for. If you truly believe such a philosophy, don't complain.

      =/ While I don't necessarily agree with what she said either, I highly respect her honest and candid response.

    • 10 months ago
  • blink180
  • gonzolively
    • 0
      gonzolively  
    • I don't agree with her, but it's her opinion either way. I was actually glad she gave her honest opinion rather than some pageant puffery piece of an answer.

    • 10 months ago
  • ChrisWT
  • Hope75
    • 0
      Hope75  
    • Way to go CARRIE!!!! for being so honest and responding the way you did. That question should have never been asked in a contest like that. She stood up for her belief. We live in a country with freedom of speech and that's exactly what she did. Perez as usual criticizing everyone and taking every oportuninty to have a spotlight whenever he can. Boooo to you Perez!!!!!!!

    • 10 months ago
  • JoeJohnson
    • 0
      JoeJohnson  
    • She was being honest and unimposing with her statement. Why is it a big deal that she spoke her mind? Whether or not I agree with what she said, I am glad that she said it.

      Perez Hilton is a drama queen and I really hope none of you are actually taking this clown seriously.

    • 10 months ago
  • igordy
    • 0
      igordy [removed]  
    • What a friendly bunch of homosexuals!!! She is entitled to her opinion - and she was asked for one. Whether is answered the exact question is a technicality - she replied with an answer she saw fit - the one she believes in and the one from her heart!

      Majority in California - present company included - voted NO on gay marriage! That's DEMOCRACY at work! Those who liberally oppose this stance on marriage will foam at their crevices with hate and venom and insult and discredit the one who uses her/his 1st amendment right at the Free Scheach. As far as I can see, judging not only by her timely answer but by both parties' after-the-event behavior - he is the asshole and a hatemonger - not her. He is a bitch - not her. His agenda was not fulfilled, so he is behaving in an undignified manner, not her. She looks like a classy lady - with a proper upbringing - and we wish her much success in life - and for him to forever be blacklisted from the world of entertainment!

    • 10 months ago
  • donkeyfly69
    • 0
      donkeyfly69  
    • igordy:

      "What a bunch of homos!!!"
      "...this stance on marriage will foam at their mouths/asses..."
      "and to stay away from queens and queers - at least the venomous ones!"

      "so he is behaving in an undignified manner"

      irony...

    • 10 months ago
  • igordy
    • 0
      igordy [removed]  
    • igordy:

      Irony? I am not miss America and I am speaking my mind - and I don't have to be politically correct either - fuck political correctness!!! Say it like it is - no sugarcoating!!! Sorry if it offends you - it's time we call things by their true names in this country - else we are turning into a nation of Barbie and Ken dolls...

    • 10 months ago
  • captain_insano
    • 0
      captain_insano  
    • igordy:

      Wow this goes to show you why we have the supreme court. Let them vote on it? If we let certain states vote for slavery and it passes then it is ok? How many people would vote for no income tax. Thats why we dont let people vote on everything. Could you imagine how the US would be right now?

    • 10 months ago
  • kaecvtionr
    • 0
      kaecvtionr  
    • I agree with her and she handled the question very well. She did however seems nervous.

      You should not be mad at her because she has her own opinion. Being mad at her because she has a different opinion, though, is another story.

    • 10 months ago
  • vickerson
    • 0
      vickerson  
    • "Do you think other states should follow suit? Why or why not?" -- Perez Hilton

      Miss CA responded that she thought it was great that we can choose for ourselves, but she was raised and believes that "marriage" should be reserved for man-woman relationships.

      Praise to her for being brave enough to express her personal opinion on a national/world stage.

      Shame to Perez Hilton for expecting a dissertation on federalism and states' rights. Would he have been at all critical if Miss CA had supported gay marriage?

      Also, his response to his own question didn't tell us if he thought other states should follow suit.

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
    • 0
      occono  
    • vickerson:

      Whether Marriage is a "state's rights" issue was already decided by SCOTUS before, in Loving. They've never heard a case on SSM.

      I agree Hilton is being petulant but I haven't seen any big gay community outrage on the issue.

    • 10 months ago
  • Pappadave
    • 0
      Pappadave  
    • Again, the ONLY reason the gay community is pushing for this is to offend the religious among us. They ALREADY have all the benefits of marriage, but just call it something different (domestic partnership or civil union). This whole "marriage" business is designed to poke Christians in the eye...nothing more. Besides, as I posted earlier, gays CAN marry so it's not a constitutional issue. They just can't "marry" each other--at least not in any State whose legislature or courts are still sane, that is.

    • 10 months ago
  • donkeyfly69
    • 0
      donkeyfly69  
    • Pappadave:

      @pappa:

      not every state has some form of d.p. or civil unions. and even in the states that do have it, there are not equal to straight marriages in any way. they don't have all (and in a lot of cases any) of the same legal rights and benefits.

      marriage is not a soley a christian institution. it also didn't even start with christianity. and christianity always has had gay and plural marriages so this isn't anything new.

      why would a gay person want to marry a person of the opposite sex? what sense does that make? if straight marriage was illegal would you marry a guy just because it's what is allowed by the law?

      seriously?

    • 10 months ago
  • FallenMorgan
  • Humdrum
  • Pappadave
    • 0
      Pappadave  
    • Pappadave:

      If your State doesn't allow "domestic partnerships" or "civil unions" then that's solvable politically. Just get your legislature to pass a law allowing them. See? Problem solved.

      Don't for an instant try to convince us that there is no "agenda" for the militantly gay community. They've made it very plain, their contempt for Christianity and those Bible-centered churches who choose to believe that the Bible means exactly what it says. I noted with horror the prancing gays, dressed like parodies of nuns who showed up in San Francisco catholic churches for "communion" shortly after the passage of Prop. 8--solely for the purpose of embarassing the congregation and the presiding priests. Most of 'em weren't even Catholic to begin with, by their own admission. Gay groups have invaded our schools demanding access to our children in those so-called sex-ed classes.

      No, I do NOT equate all gays with Mr. Perez, or, for that matter, with the aforementioned militantly gay groups. I have good friends and a late aunt who are (were) gay. Most of them are leading a perfectly contented life without making a big issue out of being either gay OR "married" to their chosen partners and none of them are into anonymous gay trysts in public restrooms (or they wouldn't be my friends for long.) All but one of them agree with me on this issue--that the term marriage should be restricted to hetero couples and no one else.

    • 10 months ago
  • occono
    • 0
      occono  
    • Pappadave:

      OK, 19 States have Constitutionally banned Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships, so no bills can do anything about that, and most of the states that haven't have rejected attempts at the matter. So people go to the Courts, and Judicially rulings are supposed to mandate the simplest possible solution.

      Secondly, there are Religions that Marry Gay Couples, and I think they feel a bit like the Law is respecting one Religion over another.

      Thirdly, seperate but equal was found to be anything but. Civil Unions have been shown to not work properly, not being recognised. You'd swear Atheists couldn't get Married in America the way some act.

      Fourthly, maybe everyone should get Civil Unions. Seperation of Church/State after all.

      I do campaign for Civil Unions, but most States mock them as "Counterfeit Marriages" so if they won't give us anything we'll fight for true equality, as long as it takes.

      I've honestly no idea what you're talking about with the San Francisco thing.

    • 10 months ago
  • CarlosIsDown
  • middle_east
  • akassan
  • nkeg87
    • 0
      nkeg87  
    • First, that question should not have been allowed at all. Secondly, I think she is entitled to her opinion. But the question was about why or why not and I don't think she answered that. She said she was raised that way. She could have said the bible or whatever is her reasoning for thinking it should not be allowed. Just because you were raised to do or believe something does not make it right or wrong. And I am not attacking her belief, I just wish she provided a reason for it.

    • 10 months ago
  • ClipsFC
  • donkeyfly69
  • nkeg87
    • 0
      nkeg87  
    • nkeg87:

      Because its not really a question that anyone can give a decent, foolproof evidenced based answer to. She couldve given reasons for her beliefs but still not sufficient for the masses. I suppose neither are the world peace questions. I think its just a divisive question that she is going to piss someone off no matter what she answers. But then again, how much do I really know about beauty pageant questions?

    • 10 months ago
  • allIknowis
    • 0
      allIknowis  
    • nkeg87:

      I agree with you nkeg87, the really sad thing about this is media whore Trump owns this contest, and all the free press he's getting he's on cloud 9. If he had any real class he'd boot Perez from next year for disrespecting the contestants. Instead he'll make him host or something.

    • 10 months ago
  • current_nando
    • 0
      current_nando  
    • This would've been my response to that question: Yeah every state should do the same if two guys or two womans wants to get marry they should be able to and it should be legal, its just a piece of paper with a stamp on it, what the heck, I mean that doesn't affects me or my values or my family or whatever, now why don't we focus on important issues and stop waisting our time discussing such pointless archaic and stupid topics...

    • 10 months ago
  • realitychick
    • 0
      realitychick  
    • Good for her and her honest response, rather than giving up her opinion for winning the crown or feeling overpowered by the minority view! She has her right to her opinion.

    • 10 months ago
  • unthought89
    • 0
      unthought89  
    • Honestly I don't see why you all become so offended by a girl in a stupid contest. Its for beauty not brains. Same sex marriage should be legalized. Love is love. Wether or not you try and out law it its still going to exist. Its not going to soil our children's future at all. It wont destroy family values. Truth is hiding your children or sheltering them from truth is what soils them because they cant handle it. You all need to get over yourself. Find a true defense. Besides how in High School you hit on a lesbian or gay man and got shot down because he wasn't straight and wouldn't have a threesome. Let go of your childish grudge.

    • 10 months ago
  • DrGlass
    • 0
      DrGlass  
    • Who gives a f*** what she thinks? First of all, she can have any opinion she wants. If you don't agree with that, well too bad. Secondly, I don't see her drafting any policy. Bigotry will only slow social change, it will never stop it. Look at how far we have come, as long as people are determined to do the right thing, the right thing will happen. No matter how many bimbos get in the way.

    • 10 months ago
  • lordsbassman
  • FallenMorgan
  • INDEPENDENT8
    • 0
      INDEPENDENT8  
    • ugh..y perez..y do u exist...shut the hell up n listen alot less.. u blew it out of proportion. Everybody has an opinion.. thats jus hers..wether u agree with it ot not.

    • 10 months ago
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • Not incredibly articulate but essentially a good answer for her. I think there may have been some editing involved in the audio track as well. Nonetheless, she stated her personal opinion and spoke basically for herself without imposing her view on others.

    • 10 months ago
  • BenK
    • 0
      BenK  
    • In my opinion that was a perfect answer, she said she believed people should be able to choose (ie legally) and gave her opinion on top of that. I see nothing 'controversial' about that. +1 Saladin

    • 10 months ago
  • ClipsFC
  • MoonLoon
    • 0
      MoonLoon  
    • Perez Hilton, needs to crawl back into his/her cave of incompetence. Political agendas should not be allowed, unless the advertisers are aware, beforehand. If they are aware, we should be allowed to punish them. Who paid for this homo-centered questioned agenda? It is not mainstream America, and the advertisers/supporters should be punished. Not for a liberal sexual agenda, ( I have no problem with that), but punish them for sneaky, dishonorable approach, to a legitimate agenda.

    • 10 months ago
  • donkeyfly69
  • jeppymom
    • 0
      jeppymom  
    • Perez Hilton put Miss California on the spot. She answered a controversial topic, he didn't like her answer, but many people did!! If he didn't want to know, he shouldn't have asked. Also, WHY did they choose Perez Hilton be a judge? He called her a 'dumb bitch' after the show. If the producers have high expectations on how their contestants should conduct themselves, they should expect the same from the judges!!!! Perez is going to try to make this girl's life a living hell, you know he will. It's too bad. He totally attacked her after the show. Talk about dividing people!! Everyone has a right to their opinion, especially if they are asked their opinion!!!.......by the way, people were cheering, not booing.

    • 10 months ago
  • lordsbassman
  • Maeveeo
  • Mikeysfake1
  • Ares
  • ClipsFC
    • 0
      ClipsFC  
    • I give her a lot of credit for being honest and responding the way she did. She was pressured by an all out gay judge in front of National Television audience. That questions should have never been asked in a contest like that. She stood up for her belief, right or wrong, that not at issue in this post. They have enough debates in California over this issue in Props and courts so they certainly do not need a contestant on Miss America to debate that. Perez as usual takes the spotlight whenever he can at any cost. Boooo to Perez.

    • 10 months ago
  • nursediesel
    • 0
      nursediesel  
    • ClipsFC:

      I tend to agree with you on this issue. This was a pageant, his question was inflammatory and he should have avoided it. Even the emcee knew he was going to ask an inappropriate question by her question to Perez before he asked it.
      She was clearly nervous but stood her ground on what she believed. Did he want her to compromise her beliefs by being 'politically correct' but lying just to make a point, his point.
      He should be on a news show or one where someone is interviewing about the subject he asked about, not on a panel of beauty pagaent judges.
      Then to make such a deroguatory remark about her is inappropriate.
      BUT today TV is all about hyping controversy to pull in bored viewers. So it could have been planned on the pageant and panels part. Too bad Miss California was set up.

    • 10 months ago
  • titan50
    • 0
      titan50  
    • ClipsFC:

      Agreed

      She pretty much gave her opinion and answered the question because that was how the question was asked, so it wasn't controversial at all. It seems to me like if you hav a different opinion on hot-button issues such as these, it tends to come off to some people as controversial.

    • 10 months ago
  • ClipsFC
    • 0
      ClipsFC  
    • ClipsFC:

      I will say these 2 words: Donald Trump. How does that sound to you ; ) Since Miss USA contest was picked up by him its been nothing but a mess. The man has zero moral and for him to produce and sponsor contests like that is just - well lets say Dumb (!?) He wants the controversy because it sells. Hence Perez. Thanks you guys for responding. I really felt bad for this girl who tried to stand up for what she believed.

    • 10 months ago
  • onlydoniauknow
  • madXmedic
  • Eat_Disco
  • MoonLoon
    • 0
      MoonLoon  
    • The question in itself is out of line She is a beauty queen, not an arbiter of social mores. The question was clearly of political content and should have been disallowed. We all know that the same sex marriage issue is based on economics, not romance.

    • 10 months ago
  • nkeg87
  • MoonLoon
  • donkeyfly69
  • MoonLoon
    • 0
      MoonLoon  
    • MoonLoon:

      I should have said that the LEGALIZATION of same sex marriages is based on economic factors. Medical benefits, S.S. benefits and survivors rights, inheritance and tax issues. What's love got to do with it? As Tina Turner would say.

    • 10 months ago
  • blue26
    • 0
      blue26  
    • Perez.... she was Not booed. At least give the girl some credit for giving her honest opinion on such a controversial issue. Not everyone is intimidated by you Perez. i grew up in a christian conservative family and now as a woman in my late 20s, i honestly believe making same sex marriage illegal is unconstitutional. i can appreciate both sides of the argument without demonizing either.

    • 10 months ago
  • ClipsFC
  • el_chivo
  • revolutioninamerica
  • mendokusai
    • 0
      mendokusai  
    • perez hilton needs to get over himself

      he is just pissed off because his personal agenda didnt get pushed forward. miss california actually didnt fumble the question as badly as one might expect. and although she didnt actually answer the question, she gave a halfway decent response.

    • 10 months ago
  • mconsul
    • 0
      mconsul  
    • not terribly controversial, but an unfortunate answer given that she wasn't asked about her opinion on same sex marriage itself, but on what states should do about it. the question presupposes that it's a controversial topic and not everyone will agree--hence a question about what states should do. and the kicker is that her opinion--while potentially disputable on political grounds--wouldn't really have ruffled too many feathers. she could've said states should hold a vote and not decide unilaterally, etc.

    • 10 months ago
  • numinant
    • 0
      numinant  
    • It's great that we're in a land where we can choose one or the other?

      Since when has Miss USA involved political opinions? Was there a presumed right answer to that question, or was it based on the strength of her reasoning (or absence, in this case)?

    • 10 months ago
  • FallenMorgan
    • 0
      FallenMorgan  
    • The Miss America Pageant is the type of thing to attract more conservative types anyways. Women who would be willing to be dolled up and paraded like a poodle or pomeranian at a dog show. I doubt many liberal feminists would be all for such a thing.

      Also, I'm not exactly all for taking someone who has a differing opinion, pointing, and saying that person is stupid or a bigot. People on both sides seem to like doing it.

    • 10 months ago
  • s_peak
    • 0
      s_peak  
    • FallenMorgan:

      One could draw staggering parallels between racism and anti-gay sentiment. I think it's fair to consider the two to be at LEAST similar... they're both hate for groups of people that you have no exposure to, or no understanding for/of.

      On that note, having anti-gay ideals is less of an "opinion" (which is subjective, and therefore, technically, infallible) and more of a moral / ethical issue which, when debated, will always boil down to prejudice, ignorance, and intolerance.

      So this argument doesn't fly:

      "I'm not exactly all for taking someone who has a differing opinion, pointing, and saying that person is stupid or a bigot. People on both sides seem to like doing it."

      because sometimes people are just plain stupid. We can all agree on certain things being "right" and "wrong" and while these things are gray areas under much scrutiny... authorities in any area of study still exist (who's opinions we should at least weigh), and she is certainly not one of them.

    • 10 months ago
  • SDLN
    • 0
      SDLN  
    • "Hey Miss Beauty Queen! You look exquisite, by the way. I love your highlights. And your dress is to die for!

      Anyway, please discuss the ontological argument for the existence of God, beginning with the arguments made by Descartes in the "Fifth Meditation", and ignoring earlier arguments such as those made in Avicenna's "The Book of Healing" and Anselm's "Proslogion.

      Thanks, and I love those shoes!"

      ;D

    • 10 months ago
  • quixotic12
  • Chris12
  • donkeyfly69
  • ryanking
  • FrankyZemo
  • gen468
  • ashcatash
  • larkjl86
  • jfill
  • Pappadave
    • 0
      Pappadave  
    • larkjl86:

      It might interest you to know that in every State, gays ARE permitted to marry so there is nothing "unconstitutional" about a law such as California's recent Proposition 8. Gays CAN marry...they just can't marry each other, but then neither can a man marry his own daughter or a woman her brother or, in most States, can first cousins marry, or a woman marry her pet poodle, for that matter.
      All most State laws on the matter do is DEFINE what constitutes a legal marriage, which is a perfecly normal and acceptable function of the State. None of that is designed to PROHIBIT gays from marrying, only to define what gender they must marry for the marriage to be legal. If gays want to live together in a committed relationship, they can form a civil union which gives all of the rights and privileges of a marriage without corrupting the TERM "marriage" which has religious implications and has been defined as a union between a man and a woman...period. In short, the woman isn't stupid...she's right!

    • 10 months ago
  • eldamon
    • 0
      eldamon  
    • larkjl86:

      pappadave, She's not "right" because she just happens to agree somewhat with you. She's right because she's basically speaking for herself. You on the other hand - not so much.

      Why is it so important to limit access to others different then us the same rights you and I enjoy? Does it really hurt you or change anything in anyway if a gay woman marries a gay man, a Chinese woman marries a Japanese man, a tall woman marries a short man or a gay woman marries another gay woman. Really, what has changed in your universe if any or all of these scenarios take place?

    • 10 months ago
  • DrGlass
  • JimboTheHippo
  • lordsbassman
  • titvol
    • 0
      titvol  
    • larkjl86:

      This guy is a disappointment to the human race. Slime ball claims to be for states rights. The citizens of California voted to deny marriage rights to queers. Is he ok with that?

    • 10 months ago
  • allIknowis
  • Nyx
    • Nyx  
    • This comment has been removed.
  • Nyx
    • 0
      Nyx  
    • Yeah, I didn't hear booing, either. Maybe you're onto something, chi (or should I call you videoguy?). Maybe there was a delay and they edited it out. But it could have been that the cheers outshone the boos since only a small part of the audience cheered when Vermont legalizing same sex marriages was mentioned.

    • 10 months ago
  • Saladin
    • 0
      Saladin  
    • She's wrong and her argument was dumb, but that wasn't that bad.

      What was controversial about that? From the position she was in, that was the only acceptable answer to give.

      A controversial answer worthy of booing would be like they're going to hell or something.

    • 10 months ago
  • larkjl86
    • 0
      larkjl86  
    • Saladin:

      I agree. She could have left the last part out and she would have been fine. When she added "my country....a marriage should be between a man and woman" it got some people mad. People can see it as according to her, everybody ("my country") should marry the opposite sex.

    • 10 months ago
  • unthought89
    • 0
      unthought89  
    • Saladin:

      I really think that any answer would have received booing. Its a pageant plenty of gay people and straight. Idk He got mad about the answer but his face showed that it was controversial and he wasn't going to get the answer he wanted. Idk boo or no boo she was wrong ha.

    • 10 months ago
  • magic6435
    • 0
      magic6435  
    • Saladin:

      "From the position she was in, that was the only acceptable answer to give."

      From the position she was in she was able to give the answer that fit what ever she believed... i certainly hope if she was for gay marriage that she would have said so...

    • 10 months ago
  • uglyghettokid
  • chivideoguy
    • 0
      chivideoguy  
    • i was about to say the same thing. I'm sure if they were it was edited out as well as possible. They like to delay these broadcasts more now ever since justin and janet.

    • 10 months ago
  • ryanking
  • blue26
  • rose_red
    • 0
      rose_red  
    • chivideoguy:

      I saw this last night on TV and I'm pretty sure there was booing. Although she is entitled to her own opinion, it probably would have been better to go along the lines of federal rights and not go on about "well in MY country we believe in the sanctity of the marriage of a man and a woman."

    • 10 months ago
  • lordsbassman
  • larkjl86
  • SDLN
  • ddhboy
    • 0
      ddhboy  
    • lordsbassman:

      My guess is that it was edited, since it doesn't make sense for the audience to cheer for Same Sex Marriage being legalized and then cheer again for her basically saying that Same Sex Marriage should be banned.

      So either the audience was for same sex or against it, and the only ones who know are the people in attendance and whoever did the delay editing for NBC.

    • 10 months ago
  • menaceIIsociety
  • larkjl86
  • realitychick
  • akamaial
    • 0
      akamaial [removed]  
    • larkjl86:

      Perez Hiltons response on 'his' blog came across as a flaming bitch fairy calling Miss California's honest and moral response to the inflammatory question a "stupid bitch"

      My question is; How did the "bitch" Perez Hilton become a judge in the Pageant in the first place?

    • 10 months ago

Add your comment

current videos