Miss USA contestant penalized for saying that marriage is between a man and a woman

Come on, everyone (including Ken Hechtman), keep repeating the words: “Homosexual marriage doesn’t threaten anyone, it just makes homosexuals equal. Homosexual marriage doesn’t threaten anyone, it just makes homosexuals equal. Homosexual marriage doesn’t threaten anyone, it just makes homosexuals equal…

Tim W. writes:

As reported by Fox, a furor was created when Miss California politely said marriage was between a man and a woman after being asked her opinion on same-sex “marriage” by a judge who just happened to be a “gay rights” blogger. The answer led to a shouting match backstage after the pageant. California pageant organizers expressed disappointment with the poor girl’s politically incorrect answer, and the homosexual blogger afterward called her a “dumb bitch” and said her answer was the worst in pageant history (here’s another link).

When something like this happens at an innocent and pleasant diversion like the Miss USA pageant, we’re in a culture no sane person could understand.

Mike Berman writes:

So now, who wins the Miss USA beauty pageant depends upon how a contestant answers a question on gay marriage. If a gay judge doesn’t like your answer to his question he will vote you down and publicly label you a “dumb bitch.” Carrie Prejean, Miss California, was ahead in points before being ambushed in the final round by a homosexual judge with an agenda.

James P. writes:

Why does a contest of female beauty have a GAY JUDGE? That’s crazy! Is there anyone less well equipped to evaluate female beauty than a homosexual male? Gays should be automatically disqualified as judges in any female beauty contest.

Morgan writes from Wigan, England:

Miss USA contestant penalized for saying that marriage is between a man and a woman

Well what does the questioner want? He asks her opinion, so she gives it, then he lays into her for holding an opinion he personally doesn’t like.

Would he prefer that she lied to him? I wouldn’t want to live in a world like that. When I was a boy, I had an aunt who used to make the best sponge cake you ever in your life ate. Every now and again, my mother would tell me that my aunt wanted me to go and try a piece of her latest cake. My aunt used to do that when she wanted an honest opinion about something (and rarely about cake). She knew that that was exactly what she’d get from me—the only person in the village she could trust to tell her honestly. This wasn’t an infrequent event. I wouldn’t know how to give a dishonest opinion if I took a degree course in “Giving a Dishonest Opinion”

The whole thing is ridiculous. What an awful state we are all in. And what an awful man he is.

N. writes:

To answer James P., if the Miss USA contest refused to allow male homosexual judges, that would be discriminatory, which is of course the ultimate modern sin (if sins actually existed in the modern world…which, of course, they cannot.).

This incident actually verifies what Ken Hechtman claimed: “gay marriage” is the litmus test of the current times, just as abortion was the litmus test of the 1980s, support of North Vietnamese Communism the litmus test of the 1960s, etc. Thus we can expect more obnoxious behavior on the part of supporters, some along the lines of the intimidation attempted by the San Francisco “Chronicle” & the No on Propositoin 8 website (publicizing addresses of donors to Prop. 8), probably more like this temper tantrum at Miss USA.

Why, one might ask? Why must ordinary people’s lives be disrupted, why must people receive threats for donating to a political cause, why must pleasant, if meaningless, diversions such as Miss USA be turned into political theater?

Because once again, a liberal cause is so important, so critical to the perfect liberal society that somehow always recedes before us like the mirage it really is, that any means justify the ends. Thus, it is to be expected that the level of rancor, obnoxiousness etc. on the part of homosexual marriage supporter will only increase, until some new bright, shiny cause comes along to capture liberal attention.

Ken Hechtman writes:

I want to know what a gay-rights blogger is doing judging a beauty contest in the first place. I mean, I’m against discrimination as much as the next guy, but there’s such a thing as qualifications for the job, isn’t there?

LA replies:

A leftist and believer in the mass re-organization of the human race to create equality asks if there are qualifications for a job? It sounds as though Ken Hechtman is “shocked.”

April 21

Charles T. writes:

Yesterday during my drive time Mr. Dennis Prager played the whole audio clip from the Miss USA episode in question. When the judge asked the question he referenced the recent court approvals of gay marriages in another state. There was some cheering from the audience but by no means overwhelming vocal approval. When miss California answered, the cheering by the audience was much greater, much louder, much more swelling. Mr. Prager pointed this out. The difference is obvious. The volume and amount of people participating in the cheering is much greater for Miss California.

This incident illustrates that the homosexual movement is not about diversity, not about equality, not about free speech, etc. The movement is about “Forcing” our society and culture to accept the homosexuality lifestyle in every publice venue or else.

Do not pay attention to what the homosexual movement leaders say, watch what they do. This episode involving the USA pageant illustrates this perfectly. This is fascism in action.

LA replies:

“Is Mr. Hechtman also among the traditionalists? There is hope after all.”

No. He’s having an unprincipled exception episode.

But I shouldn’t put it down, since, as I’ve pointed out, the unprincipled exception is the only acceptable way that non-liberal attitudes can be expressed in liberal society.

Morgan writes:

Words from Theodore Dalrymple:

When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.’

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 20, 2009 02:03 PM | Send