Carrie-d Away Over The Gay Marriage Debate
When Donald Trump emerges as the voice of reason in a controversy, you know things have gotten out of hand. I refer to The Donald’s correct decision today to allow Miss California-USA, Carrie Prejean, to keep her state crown in the wake of her comments during the Miss USA pageant that she is against same sex marriage. That wasn’t all, of course.
There were the semi-nude photos of Prejean that came out after the pageant, held up as evidence of her hypocrisy about being a Christian conservative. There were her breast implants, which were paid for by the California pageant (I’ll bet Miss North Dakota was never given that option). There was the political firestorm over her opinions on same-sex marriage. There was Perez Hilton, who is thwarting my best efforts to not know anything about him.
Wow. When you can put gays, gossip, politics, Donald Trump, and boobs under one headline, you’ve got yourself the Great American News Story. But there’s only one problem: this wasn’t much a story in terms of real news.
Let’s add up all the elements, as we call them in the news business:
--Prejean was asked a question during the Miss USA pageant, and she answered it. According to polls, it was an answer a large percentage of Americans, if not an outright majority, would have given. She even added that she meant no offense to anyone by saying she believed marriage should be between a man and a woman. That is not hate speech, and that should have been the end of it. I mean, people, this was the Miss USA pageant, not a presidential debate. And if only one answer to the question was going to be deemed acceptable by the one posing it (Mr. Hilton, one of the pageant judges), it should not have been asked.
--The uproar from same-sex marriage advocates over her answer was ridiculous and unworthy of serious attention. If they are so uncertain of their position that the words of a 21-year-old beauty contestant can shake them up, they need to, as my little boy would say, take a chill pill. The idea of same-sex marriage is hardly being suppressed these days.. quite the contrary. If people on the perceived “liberal” side of this debate don’t want to be regarded as PC-crazy zealots, they need to not be so reactive to an opinion that was hardly coming from a Supreme Court justice.
--Similar bad faith moves were made on the conservative end of the spectrum. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) had no business making Prejean their spokesperson in the midst of the frenzy. As stated above, she’s a 21-year-old woman who gave an honest, off-the-cuff answer to a no-win question. That doesn’t make her ready to be the new Anita Bryant. NOM exploited Prejean, even if she wanted to join up with them. The organization and she should have at least waited until she served her year as Miss California. But it seems like NOM had its best interests at heart, and not hers.
--Girls, try not to have any nude or semi-nude pictures of you circulating if you plan on doing things to raise your profile in the future, things like trying to win Miss USA. Having said that, though, young people do things that often don’t show good judgment. But in the case of her pictures, it doesn’t make her ineligible to be a Miss USA contestant (did you SEE the bikini she wore in the pageant?) and it doesn’t make her ineligible to be a sincere Christian conservative.
Let’s summarize: a young woman gave a nationally-televised answer to a question that had no business being asked, gay marriage supporters badly overreacted, the anti-gay marriage side rushed inappropriately to co-opt her, and Ms. Prejean set herself up for embarrassment with pictures she unwisely posed for, and then wasn’t completely honest about. Sounds like all parties involved didn’t exactly distinguish themselves. Except for Donald Trump. His message today was one everybody involved needed to hear: she keeps her Miss California-USA title, and everybody else needs to calm the ---- down.
And it’s validity as a genuine news story? Well, some are arguing Ms. Prejean has reignited the national debate over same-sex marriage. I agree we need that debate. But not if it’s launched by a young woman four years removed from childhood who was just trying to win a beauty contest when the whole matter came up.
| Search Blog
|
Comments: 14
Wow, I actually agree with Jim Watkins on this one!! Alright Jim, I'm going to give you another chance -- maybe you are not the archetype Upper West Side liberal after all. I am watching Channel 11 tonight -- no more Ernie Anastos for me.
Being a lesbian myself i agree to the fact that there should have been a big deal the opinion of a young woman trying to fit in well doesnt really matter and to be honest our rights are determined by the higher up not a beauty queen really come on. absolutely i agree there should have been no big deal and if she didnt want her pictures out there well keep more clothes on and that would have happened!
why is this allowed and vanessa williams was humiliated and lost her crown immediately?
why is this and the other one last time excused and the incident brushed off with no penalties?
this is not fair treatment
Jim, you nailed it. I will leave it at that because it can't be said better.
Very disappointed in you Jim - the majority of Americans are turning in favor of marriage equality. Your thoughts are purely from the subjective mind of a white, heterosexual male who never has known any other state of existence other than that of being priviledged. You really need to stick to reporting the news and not releasing your homophobic side to the viewing public. Used to like you Jim - but siding with a blonde bimbo as she spews discrmination and separation in the year 2007? Look away from her boobs Jim - and you may be able to think logically again.
Very disappointed in you Jim - the majority of Americans are turning in favor of marriage equality. Your thoughts are purely from the subjective mind of a white, heterosexual male who never has known any other state of existence other than that of being priviledged. You really need to stick to reporting the news and not releasing your homophobic side to the viewing public. Used to like you Jim - but siding with a blonde bimbo as she spews discrmination and separation in the year 2009? Look away from her boobs Jim - and you may be able to think logically again.
Cheryl, you are wrong. There is a big difference here. The Vanessa Williams pictures were not just nudies . . . they were explicit sex. I saw those that were published. She was in explicit sexual positions with another woman. Vanessa has come out of this with dignity and it is a great credit to her.
greetings from ord, nebraska. as you said jim, this is not an earth shattering event. i believe we all still have freedom of speech don't we? of course i haven't checked the news yet today. with everything else going on in this country, i can't believe this story has worked folks into a frenzy. watch you guys almost every night. keep up the good work.
PIX = SUCKS
What absolutely kills me is the fact that people can shield their discrination and ignorance of gay people behind the "freedom of speech" mantra.
If this woman had said disparaging remarks about ANY other type of people (blacks, jews, latinos, italians, etc.) there would be NO question that her title would be ripped from her in seconds. But state your opposition to the Gay Community and WOHOO! it's Freedom of Speech! The negative, media perceptions of gay people is so dated and tiring that to have this notion reinforced and actually supported by the powers that be (Trump, PIX-news at 10, etc.) is downright appalling. Nobody wants to hear what a News Anchor thinks about ANYTHING. Just tell us the News please, and let us decide. Channels 5 & 9 here we come!
and isn't ironic that this woman who poses with her privates out for the world to see is chosen by right-wing groups to lead their mission against committed loving couples - people who simply wish to live honorable lives and to be treated as equal human beings? Doesn't anyone else see the irony in all of this? People do not choose to be gay - and they're treated like dirt, but people who make questionable decisions like posing half nude are heraled as heroes? Is this the values that Mr. Watkins would like young women to aspire to? God Help us all.
"And if only one answer to the question was going to be deemed acceptable by the one posing it (Mr. Hilton, one of the pageant judges), it should not have been asked."
This is the ridiculous part. The guy asked the question, he didn't like the answer given, and then he did bashing. Can't find a better genius than him...
This reflects some people's craziness. whoever openly support traditional marriage will be bashed like crazy.
"the majority of Americans are turning in favor of marriage equality"
Are you surely about this? Or is it just one of the infamous yellow journalism from the pro same sex marriage liberal medias?
I am a Christian conservative, and I absolutely refuse to be labeled "homophobic" or "bigotry" (another bashing from liberal medias). People can practice homosexual acts in their own private room all they want, but they have absolutely NO right to change the definition of marriage, and force others to accept it by changing laws by the help of liberal activist judges (by making laws from the judiciary branch)!!!
And by the way, homosexuality IS a choose, not born (like race and skin color). The "gay gene" theory from Dean Hamer is a myth, a BS, a pseudo science to make "scientific" excuse for this behavior.
By the way, those homosexual activists apparently love democracy - until it doesn't work for their favor.
CA passed the prop 8, which means more people favor traditional marriage. Guess what? now those activists are try to go to the liberal judges to override the prop 8. So much for democracy and rule by the people... Those guys just want the laws to work in their favor, by whatever means necessary...
And in Iowa, another liberal activist judge legalized same sex marriage, even enough the people there overwhelming oppose it. And when the Dems there controls the state legislature, they are not planning to allow people to vote on it (because they know it will be overturned by the voters if it is on the ballet). And Iowa cannot make a quick prop 8 like CA did. The liberal politicians and judges monopolized the law making process and won't allow people to decide.
Yeah, I bet you won't hear these from liberal medias, would you?
You're so unintelligent it is not even worth the time to debate you. Being gay is NOT a choice - have you even bothered to ASK or eveb speak to a gay person? You don't have a clue - do you? Just as we do not choose our ethnicity or the color of our skin - we do not choose our orientation!
Do you think people would choose this and have to deal with crackpots like you? Did you CHOOSE your heterosexuality? You really need to do some homework buddy.