-
Website
http://www.sassyqarla.com/ -
Original page
http://www.sassyqarla.com/2009/04/perez-hilton-says-miss-california-2009.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
- Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart Rumors 'Shelved', Rob and Emilie de Ravin Museum 'Date'!
- Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart - Facebook and Photo Treats!
- Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart - Rob's 'Single' Revelation, Kristen Missing in Action!
- Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart - Dating Rumors 'Dead' After 'New Moon'!
- Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart and Taylor Lautner - Teen Vogue and SNL Winners!
Karroll, If you think / say " the Miss USA pagent sure has gone to the dogs for letting someone like Perez Hilton be a judge " What does that say about the selected contestants HMm? they are suppose to be representing an entire Country, the melting pot if you will which also includes many cultural, religious, lifestyle Choices. Not a very smart answer from such a stupid clone of a stupid clone. It was in plain sight what she was doing, or what she was told to say, she was totally coached. Do you honestly think that question was not covered in a hypothetical question you should be ready for? That is one of the top issues in this country, and to answer it like a freakin child, and you support legal action against someone who voices his opinion, just like she did? then he can sue her and back and forth it goes! Yeah, thats the way to be
Understand! Who made you god? and how are so enlightened What is wrong and what is right?
I think Your Wrong, in fact , I know your wrong! Somewhere in your life you decided to join a belief system because it was easier for you , right, ? Well so this belief system that you believe in also created everyone and everything ? right? so then also created differences too right? so why is that?
do you think the creator wanted this minority to be hated and treated differently? or rather a test of a person who was true, when they went to church everysunday saying everyone is equal except these people. which is it? are you being tested? are they not created by your same creator? hmm. what will you hate next?
Americans ? whats the motive here. to win something and pretend to be someone your not apparently! My beef here is that Laura is claiming to be some kind of authority in the matter by saying Ms. California is right for not supporting gay marriage! You are applauding the wrong people!
But, you start a rant when ANYONE even DARES to think differently than you. Who's the Nazi now?
You demand your right to speak out while denying her rights? The fact is, it was the conviction that certain right are unalienable because they come from God that got us the Bill of Rights. Freedom works both ways, bud. If someone doesn't have it, then soon, no one will have it.
And just for fun, when did non-believers in Scripture begin to be the authorities on what it says?
I am tired of people who deny the Scriptures telling me how to read it. But, because we ARE believers, we accept your freedom to disagree all you want.
People like you killed us before, are killing us all over the world, and will do so in the future. But the only judgment that matters is coming, and we both will stand before the Judge and He will make the decision for us both.
Disagree all you want, but be civil and recognize that you are not the sole arbiter of truth.
Very well said!
Written with civility and conviction!
Judy
I not only hold hilton responsable but I hold Trump responsable for not previewing the questins and for having hilton as a judge. Let's get a serial killer to be a judge next year and ask if it is ok to murder somebody. I think trump is a scum too and really always have.
Beyond that, though, is the point of these panic attack questions. They know what kinds of questions will be coming at them, and most of these ladies have been trained from birth to dish up some pablum about "all the world's children", but the point is to learn whether they can think on their feet and articulate their opinion. Whether their views coincide with those of a particular "judge" should be beside the point.
California VOTED to uphold the ideology of marriage being between a man and a woman. Miss California (1) has a right to her opinion, and (2) reflects the opinion of the majority of this state. Mr. Perez does NOT.
The question, which is founded in religion, should have never been asked, in the first place.
Mr. Perez is a horse's ass.
But yes, of course she has the right to freedom of speech and to say her opinion, but everyone knows whatever you say can be used against you. White nazi skinheads can talk about their opinion, but that doesn't make it right and it gives them the right to be judged based on their opinion.
So yes Miss CA, say what you'd like, but yes, especially when you're in a pageant, you can expect to be judged from whatever you say. Isn't that the point of the interview questions anyway?
May God Bless you Miss California!!
Or blacks.
Is that OK? Is that Ok with you "freedom of speech" people? You have been given a brain - use it.
Talk about using YOUR brain.
Your statement is distasteful but, this is America if this is what you want to say you should be allowed to say it.
I personally side with the contestant from California. She should be free to share her opinion without ramifications and criticism. An American's right to free speech should be our guide. P Hilton was an unfit, unprofessional and totally unqualified to be a judge.
LOL... Practice what you preach my friend.
ahem: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07...
Miss California answered his "trick" question truthfully and from her heart according to her faith and beliefs. She said what a vast majority of good people feel deeply in this country. Perez has no redeeming qualities and has no value as a "judge", blogger and anything else.
I find it ironic that the very thing they are fighting for is the very thing that they deny the rest of us.
The negativity toward the judging is based on the lack of professionalism shown by one bias judge P Hilton who proved he had no business being a judge! I see only a few putting down homosexualism as a way of life but, the great thing about America is free speech and people can do that in this country because their freedom of speech is protected by the constitution.
we are all entitled in our opinion,,
i think miss california was just being herself,,
she didnt mean anything about it,,
no one can blame her,,
she was raised that way!!
aside from that,
its really ridiculous to have this so called same sex marriage!!!
perez hilton was just talking about himself!!!
It was a direct question to her and she answered the way she felt about it. I think Perez is just jealous cause he doesn't look as good as her in a dress. Perez you make me sick. As for dum b*&%*.. Go look in the mirror.
she stod upp for her self... but unfortunatly you where the judge.... you shuld'nt be a judge as hole.
GOD BELSS you miss cali AND YOU SHOULD WIN
GOD BLESS YOU MISS CALIFORNIA!!!!!!!!
We love you here in Misssissippi.
Paris Hilton was not involved. It was some guy named Perez Hilton. Don't know his relationship to Paris Hilton. Maybe he is a cousin or something but, probably he is just someone who used to have a name like John Smith or something who changed his name to Hilton to capitalize off of the association with the Hilton name. That is just speculation. I do not think that I had ever heard of him before about 2 days ago so, he must not be real famous. Anyway, he does not seem to be qualified as a judge because he brings his personal biases into judging.
Actually, Miss California was quite diplomatic. She began her statement by saying no offence is intended to anyone!
About the opinion she must sue Hilton, why not? it's not about his opinion or his right to free speech, he took away her opportunity to be Miss USA, his behavior was discriminatory that's why she has the right to sue him.
That is a wierd comparison, gay marriage is not a race related issue! Being gay has no relationship to being black, white, indian or asian, If the issue is about not offending, do not compare being gay to being black because many black people are offended by the comparison!
Anyway, the theme of discussion here is much more about free speech and the right to have an opinion. As Americans, we have the constitutional right to say what we believe without people restricting our free speech. This is what Miss California did. She stated what she believed. It was an unfair question because in previous pageants judges have stayed away from controversial subjects. Had all the judges stayed to normal questions could have answered she wanted world peace or to feed the hungry or something and won. As it was, she showed great courage and integrity stating her true beliefs.
Seperation of Church & State
You see the problem? The beauty pagent for WOMEN who are REAL Women would almost necissarily contain STRAIGHT Women - some of which would think that Marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman.
However, if marriage can be defined as anything else, what do we define it as? Can it be a union between man and man/ woman and woman?
Can it be union between man and animal
Can it be union between man and child
Can it be union between Business and Business?
Can it be union between any two entities (Such as partnerships amongst corporate firms)?
Can it be a union between two children?
Does it have to be a union at all?
Can it be an adoration that two entities have for each other?
Does it have to be a mutual adoration?
Can it just be one entity adoring another entity? (IF so, then Ashton Kutcher has a lot of wives!)
Let's say that it must be a mutual union
Does that union have to have any expectations?
Do the united have to live together or can they just be united in purpose and not location?
Or can they be united in location, but not in purpose?
Should we expect these united to be committed to staying united?
Does the unity have to be verified or just simply stated?
Does the unity have to be sanctified by any group or individuals?
If so, then who/what group is allowed to sanctify such a thing?
Should all marriages have priveledges that are exactly equal or should some have more priveledges?
With that in mind, besides tax codes, contracts, and debt, what are the benefits of marriage?
I would surmise that changing the definition of marriage and allowing it to be ordained by any group of people would be harmful to the benefits of marriage.
1. If banks can't expect the united entities to stay united for any period of time, why would they secure that group a larger loan due to the nature of their unity? Their loan would only be doaled out as an individual... and it would hurt everyone
2. Tax benefits would change too. Married people are expected to serve in creating the utopian environment for children. This costs a lot of money and therefore there are tax breaks for married individuals. However, if you were to be married and not expect to have children (99.9999% of the LGBT community) then why would we continue to allow such a credit?
3. Why would anyone make a contract with a married entity if that entity would be liable of separating and thus highly probable to breaking thier contract?
I thought California's response was true to herself and to her beliefs, while still maintaining compassion for those who believe otherwise. She did not say that her opinion was right and how it should be, but she made know that it was her OPINION and that she was raised to believe that way. Shame on Perez Hilton, he is giving the LGBT community a bad image. If they respect our opinions, we will in turn respect theirs.
Why is a gay man a judge in a beauty pagent where he's judging the beauty of women? He's gay, so he already has no fucking clue what beauty in a woman is in the first place...he's gay?
Why on Earth do we care what a homosexual man has to say about a beautiful woman like Ms. Prejean? He already shows a complete lack of judgement by preferring the harry ass of another man over what can only be described as an incredibly beautiful woman.
May God , the Lord Jesus bless her
Amen
May God , the Lord Jesus bless her
Amen
Miss California lost because of her answer to the question about gay marriage.
The judge, regardless of his or her personal beliefs and lifestyle is there to be impartial and judge fairly . . . that is the sign of a great judge, to give someone high marks even though you do not necessarily agree with his/her position.
You could clearly see on Perez's face that he was personally insulted, because he is gay. To let his personal feelings be the determining factor for a prestigious event is deplorable.
. . . It is not how she answered the question her in trouble, but it is clearly what she said when she answered. You could see Perez Hilton just shake his head in personal disappointment.
This is not what and who we need judging a Miss America Pageant.
SnellvilleGA Citizen
Donald Trump, you owe us better than this and you should be speaking out more than anyone.
And has anyone checked out his website. Talk about a guy who can't take some of his own medicine. There is not one good thing on his website about anybody. I understand the freedom of speech, but come on, this guy is ridiculous. Should those celebrities bounce back and attack Perez? What would Perez do?
Miss California is the Miss USA in my book. An honest woman is exactly the kind of role model we should want our children to look up to as Miss USA. If we are being persecuted for honesty, well then there's no hope for any of us anymore.
What a great way to promote Miss America Show ....
just a comment ...
Perez: We are all humans who live our own lives, with our own opions remember that before you open your mouth.
Good Job California!!!
It just goes to show you--People like "Perez" want tolerance and want to be able to say and do what they want, but they don't want to give that freedom to someone who opposes their opinion! Where is the tolerance for her and for her to be able to give her opinion. She said it nicely and she didn't bash anyone, she wasn't rude. He isn't giving any respect for her!!!
That having been said, he asked the question, she gave her honest answer. Then he went and threw a tantrum about it, which means one of two things.
1) He thought she'd answer in favor of gay marriage, and assumed, or
2) He didn't know how she'd answer, but knew he'd hate one of the two responses, and asked anyway.
Either way, what a tool.
So I say Carrie should sue him to the ground, and show a good example by doing this.
What Carrie has to endure for her believes is absurd. I've had my house pelted with a rock just because I had a Yes on 8 sign on my lawn -- exercising Freedom of Speech should not be answered with vandalism, violence, or any form of disrespect.
ABSOLUTE THUMBS DOWN TO GAY MARRIAGE !!
really, its disgusting to just imagine how they will satisfy their physiological needs.
I do not.
I will not attack you for your belief and opinion.
You should not attack me for mine.
I do not hate you for your belief.
You should not hate me for mine.
Let us allow our democratic process to work and vote on the issue.
I am willing to accept the outcome. Are you?
.
It's only fair correct, oh thats right HIS opinion is the correct one. My mistake. Seriously Perez, get of your high horse, don't be hypocritical. Start by respecting her views then maybe we'll consider respecting yours.
You are a poor excuse for a human being. Get a life.
She has a right to her opinion as much as you do. I guess I shouldn't expect anything more from you. Liberals want to exclude free speech when it runs contrary to their own. I think your actions speak volumes for your community.
This is just the pussification of America. Everyone has to be politically correct.
Neither fornicators,nor idolaters,nor adulterers,nor homosexuals,nor sodomites,nor thieves,nor covetous,nor drunkards,nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 CORINTHIANS 6:9-10)
1) Prejean voiced her views (one I happen to disagree with).
2) She has been criticized publicly for this.
3) Others have criticized the critics sighting freedom of speech.
4) The critics defend themselves also sighting their own freedom of speech.
In step 1, Prejean has the right to express her views (so long as they do not insight hate) reasonable or bigoted they may be.
In step 2, her critics also have the right and responsibility to express their views or dislike for Prejean's opinions. This is a the heart of healthy debate within our social structure and is the KEY function of freedom of speech. Because both sides express their opinions, people have the chance to gain understanding of what arguments are valid and which ones are merely untenable.
How then is step 2 a violation of freedom of speech as some seem to think it is? If you say something I disagree and I reply with a good retort that destabilizes your argument, I haven't violated your freedom of speech, I've just forced you to think harder maybe even reconsider your perspective... This is very important in a democracy because it gives us the chance to change our minds when we are shown that we might be mistaken.
Nobody has had their freedom of speech violated in this whole scenario, just a whole lot of shallow view have been expressed and a few more insightful ones. Fundamental to believing in freedom of speech is that you will defend the rights of expression specifically for those who's views you detest. One detriment to it is that fools, liars, sheep, pawns and idiots have equal rights to their expression as do the fair, intelligent and considerate. This is why most of what we hear is nonsense and why many here are so confused... I repeat, there were no freedom of speech violations here just a beauty queen with bigoted views that she has every right to express.
Why the hell are we even talking about freedom of speech then, it's a red herring. No more freedom of speech talk. Topic OVER, get back to talking about the original issue, gay marriage.
MSNBC and all the far lefties needs to leave this woman alone. She shares the same freedom of speech as Perez Hilton does. After all, he did get to go vent about it and call her a B!TCH on youtube. That's fine, but to me by the way he did it just shows low character on his behalf. He needs to put a sock in it if you ask me, and that goes for the media as welll.
**By saying blacks and gays, I want to note that I do not think this way of all black people, gay people.**
It was white folks that founded this country and african americans helped build this place, but slavery has been over for a LONG time. There's no more racism. It's just them thinking they deserve something because their great great great grand daddy was a slave.
To sum things up, we give the minorities so much protection and say, that when someone disagrees with them they can't handle it. They are the one's that are racist. Perez Hilton obviously has a problem with anyone believing marriage should be between a man and a woman. He is nothing but a Hippocratic with a bad attitude. Enough said.
GOD HAS MORE BEAUTIFUL BLESSING FOR U! =]
SHE DID SAY NO OFFENSE PEREZ HILTON IS SUCH AN IDIOT AHAHA I MEAN WTF..AHAHA HE MAKES ME LAUGH OF HOW DUMB HE IS
That being said Miss C still have the rights to say how she feel.
To ANN
the Bible also at one time say it was a sin to eat shell fish and that the "man of the house" has the right to beat his wife and sell his daughter into prostitution.