Likely to Spark Controversy

I heard about this story yesterday.

Miss California Carrie Prejean, an apparent "shoo-in" for the Miss USA title, gave a controversial answer to a question regarding gay marriage. Rather than be a crowd-pleaser, she answered honestly, staying true to her personal convictions. She said,

"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."

Now, she (along with many others, I'm sure) is wondering if this response cost her the title. Perez Hilton (the homosexual judge who read the question to Miss California) certainly thinks it did. I'm inclined to agree, and I have only one thing to say to the Miss USA program:


From what I read on the Miss USA website, the interview portion of the competition is for the judges to learn about the "successes, goals, and ambitions" of each contestant. To me, this means posing questions similar to those found in job interviews, i.e. "tell me about a time where you worked in a group to achieve a goal" or the like. You know, questions that give some insight to someone's character. Asking politically and morally charged questions does not give any insight into the "successes, goals, and ambitions" of a person. The only information it gives about a person is their personal opinion on a controversial subject. If our character is defined by our political opinions, we're all in a lot of trouble. Additionally, I think Miss California is an excellent example of strong character. She was obviously aware that her response would be unpopular, yet she didn't change her convictions to fit what the judges and the crowd wanted to hear. That's the kind of conviction that a person in the public eye needs to have.

Second, does anyone else find it suspicious that a homosexual judge "randomly" selected the question about gay marriage? Sure, maybe it WAS total coincidence. Maybe the moon is made of cheese. Incidentally, I found this comment on this story from a gentleman who is a self-described "non-religious conservative who has no problem with gay marriage":

PS…why exactly is a gay man judging a female beauty contest???? Isn’t that like having a vegan judge a BBQ cookoff?

I'm sure the producers of the pageant were looking for ways to boost viewing, but I think this went too far. The pageant is getting exposure at the cost of a young woman who is now being labeled a bigot. Do I think she could have worded her response a little better? Sure. She was on live television and was required to give an answer to a controversial question on the spot. I doubt there are many of us who could answer such a question with even a modicum of poise (Look at Miss Teen South Carolina, for example). However, she gave her answer with confidence and conviction in her position. I think she would have been a strong representative for the United States.

I'm not sure I want to live in a country where a woman is booed for expressing her personal opinion on an issue, no matter how unpopular it may be.


Natalie Sadler said...

Sadly, having strong character isn't exactly at the height of popularity. Slowly people become drones and crowd-pleasing robots in the heat of all this . . . GARBAGE. That's all it is--GARBAGE!!

And I don't think this, a newsletter from the AFA I receive almost daily, will make you any more happy:

"America's most basic freedoms of speech, conscience and the free exercise of religion are under attack and the time to act is now. If President Obama succeeds with his priority of passing the Hate Crimes law, H.R. 1913 - the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, it could lead to the criminalization of the Biblical view of homosexuality in sermons and elsewhere. An offended homosexual could accuse a pastor, Sunday School teacher of broadcaster of causing emotional injury simply by expressing the Biblical view that homosexuality is sinful.

H.R. 1913 is one more step in the campaign to legitimize homosexuality in our culture by treating it as a protected class along with race, gender, and religion. The long term goal is to create one more platform from which to eradicate wrong thinking about homosexuality. H.R. 1913 will undoubtedly pave the way to legislation that will make thinking Biblically about homosexuality a "hate crime."

This is such a sad, sad situation.

Brad and Hailey said...

I didn't get the chance to watch the program but I am glad to heat that she said what was right and in her heart not what was most popular. I wouldn't worry as she will be rewarded for her loyalty to the right :)

Parkers said...

Ha Ha! "Isn't it like having a vegan judge a BBQ cook off". Probably the best thing that has been said about this whole controversy :)

The Lowe's said...

I love your controversial blog topics. They are always so fun to read and so full of passion. Keep on sista'.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...