Thanks, God, for helping me lie

[freemonkey]

Originally Posted by Rocky

I don't believe I mentioned denying anyone their freedom of speech. Just surprised at how intolerant the tolerant libs are these days.

The way I'm seeing it is that she's being called on her intolerance and hypocrisy. She voiced her opinion and was criticized for it. All the hubbub might have lasted a few days.

But then she claimed she lost the pageant because of her views. And she knows this how?

And then she went on to make an even bigger deal out it.

Then some semi-nude photos surfaced of her and now she's claiming.... what exactly?

[ChuckF]

People, she is making bank on the "controversy." I have no idea who actually won the pageant or whatever. Who do you think is getting more, ahem, exposure? Prejean or the winner?

Says wiki:

Following the pageant, Prejean appeared in a television advertisement for the National Organization for Marriage's campaign against gay marriage,[17] which had contacted her shortly after the pageant.[18] She also hired a Christian public relations firm.[19] In late April, Prejean presented an award at the Gospel Music Association's 2009 Dove Awards in Nashville, Tennessee.[6]

On May 1, Prejean stated on On the Record w/ Greta Van Susteren that she did not have an opinion on civil unions for same-sex couples, but that she supports rights of same-sex couples, such as hospital visitations.[18] She has stated that she would be willing to meet with representatives from California's largest gay rights group "as long as it's not political".[6]

Really, how long before Regnery publishes the autobiography of anti-gay marriage bloc's recent martyr?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Zehava

I disagree here. She was asked and voiced her opinion, as much as I may disagree with she said, she does have a right to say it. The timing of the discovery of the topless photos is suspect and looks like retaliation to me, which I find reprehensible.

Sure, she has a right to voice her opinion, but that doesn't imply that the pageant organizers or judges or whoever have an obligation to avoid imposing consequences on her for voicing an opinion they disagree with. AFAIK, the pageant is not an arm of the state.

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by Adam

Sure, she has a right to voice her opinion, but that doesn't imply that the pageant organizers or judges or whoever have an obligation to avoid imposing consequences on her for voicing an opinion they disagree with. AFAIK, the pageant is not an arm of the state.

Yeah, maybe Trump learned his lesson and won't have any more flaming queers as judges for a Beauty pageant.

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by freemonkey

The way I'm seeing it is that she's being called on her intolerance and hypocrisy. She voiced her opinion and was criticized for it. All the hubbub might have lasted a few days.

But then she claimed she lost the pageant because of her views. And she knows this how?

And then she went on to make an even bigger deal out it.

Then some semi-nude photos surfaced of her and now she's claiming.... what exactly?

I don't see how answering his question showed intolerance or hypocrisy from her. I mean, she didn't even call him a beotch, which when you think about it, was more descriptive of Perez than her.

[Zehava]

Originally Posted by Adam

Sure, she has a right to voice her opinion, but that doesn't imply that the pageant organizers or judges or whoever have an obligation to avoid imposing consequences on her for voicing an opinion they disagree with. AFAIK, the pageant is not an arm of the state.

Sure they are free to impose whatever consequences they want, being a private organization. From what little I have paid attention to this I find no reason to believe that she lost the competition due to voicing her opinion to which a judge disagreed.

What I wanted to point out is the fact that they are holding these women to incredibly high ethical and moral standards yet it seems that others involved with the pageant (possibly the organizers and/or judges) are not. Seems hypocritical to me that the ones holding the contestants to these standards are not themselves subject to said standards. More of the distasteful "do as I say not as I do" moralizing.

[freemonkey]

Originally Posted by Rocky

I don't see how answering his question showed intolerance or hypocrisy from her. I mean, she didn't even call him a beotch, which when you think about it, was more descriptive of Perez than her.

Her hypocrisy is showing in things she's saying and doing after the pageant.

FWIW, when I first heard about this whole thing, a day or two after it happened, I actually felt bad for her because I thought it was a question they probably should not have asked in the first place. It seemed a bit unfair.

But because it has gone on to become such a crapfest I feel less bad for her. They are all making money out and getting attention from it. I'm pretty sure much of the controversy is manufactured to get the most bang for their buck, as it were.

[livius drusus]

The former Miss Nevada who was dethroned a couple of years ago when topless candids of her leaked is pissed. She was 17 too and they were party shots, not posed modelling pictures.

Trump and the Miss USA organization are all over the map. I guess these scandal-in-a-pisspot stupidities are the only way for them to stay relevant.

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by freemonkey

But because it has gone on to become such a crapfest I feel less bad for her. They are all making money out and getting attention from it. I'm pretty sure much of the controversy is manufactured to get the most bang for their buck, as it were.

No doubt about that. Trump even said "he's loves controversy". Go figure. It just puts him and his pageant in the limelight. Trump, Miss Cali, Perez...they're all benefiting from this. What's funny is I doubt most even know who actually won the pageant.

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by Rocky

Yeah, maybe Trump learned his lesson and won't have any more flaming queers as judges for a Beauty pageant.

Trump invited him back, twit. And flaming queers generally are the pageants' biggest fans.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Zehava

Sure they are free to impose whatever consequences they want, being a private organization. From what little I have paid attention to this I find no reason to believe that she lost the competition due to voicing her opinion to which a judge disagreed.

What I wanted to point out is the fact that they are holding these women to incredibly high ethical and moral standards yet it seems that others involved with the pageant (possibly the organizers and/or judges) are not. Seems hypocritical to me that the ones holding the contestants to these standards are not themselves subject to said standards. More of the distasteful "do as I say not as I do" moralizing.

I haven't actually been following this outside , so I don't really have an opinion on that....I'm not even sure what behavior you're describing as hypocritical. I just wanted to climb on my soap box and point out that free speech doesn't mean there are no consequences for what you say.

[Wonderbread Leotard]

Originally Posted by Adam

I just wanted to climb on my soap box and point out that free speech doesn't mean there are no consequences for what you say.

That's true. People who advocate (among other things) the legal sexual enslavement of teen and tween bimbs and the celebration of female sexual sadism against them might even get called "wonderbread" by Indiana boys!

[Zehava]

Originally Posted by Adam

I haven't actually been following this outside , so I don't really have an opinion on that....I'm not even sure what behavior you're describing as hypocritical. I just wanted to climb on my soap box and point out that free speech doesn't mean there are no consequences for what you say.

Outside of this thread I haven't been paying it any attention either so I could be talking out of my

I always thought the question/answer portion of the contest was more to see how the contestants handled pressure and composed themselves, not so much about important content, hence questions like "How would you make the world a better place?"

[BDS]

I think anyone who enters a beauty contest should be disqualified from winning.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Sovereign

That's true. People who advocate (among other things) the legal sexual enslavement of teen and tween bimbs and the celebration of female sexual sadism against them might even get called "wonderbread" by Indiana boys!

OMGBBQSTATEBURN!!!11!!!

[MonCapitan2002]

Originally Posted by Zehava

Jesus H. mother fucking Christ, some amateur/semi-/professional model was photographed topless with/without her permission and now that she is a Miss USA contestant this is a problem? Models are called upon all the time to appear nude/semi-nude, it's the business.

For fucks sake America, get over your sexual hang ups already. A ~2second nipple flash on TV is not a national crisis, nor is the fact that a beauty pageant contestant posed for topless photos.

How long before we check to ensure that contestants have an intact hymen, after all premarital sex is immoral ain't it?

And whose morals are we gong to judge them by? Mine? Yours? Conservative, Liberal, religious, atheist? 1600's Puritan? Unless "highest ethical and moral standards" are rigidly defined in the contact they are essentially meaningless, IMO.

I disagree here. She was asked and voiced her opinion, as much as I may disagree with she said, she does have a right to say it. The timing of the discovery of the topless photos is suspect and looks like retaliation to me, which I find reprehensible.

If she signed a contract proscribing certain behaviors and did them anyway, then she deserves to lose her job. While I do not find posting topless (or nude for that matter) to be anything but innocuous, I am not the one interpreting her contract.

As for the relation she is receiving, she is getting what she deserved. If you refuse to take the heat for stating a controversial opinion, then don't state it. She could have refused to answer the question or chosen to abstain from expressing her opinion. She didn't and she is answering for them now.

[Dingfod]

Originally Posted by Rocky

I'm sure Jimmy Carter is. He's actually going to get to move up a spot.

Dubya assured every President we ever had a move up a notch. Not sure where Obama ranks yet, he's far from done.

[yguy]

Originally Posted by freemonkey

The way I'm seeing it is that she's being called on her intolerance

That would make a lot more sense had she displayed any. The shining beacon of intolerance in this instance is Perez Hilton.

[Watser?]

Yes, because when we Christians call you immoral and tell you you will burn in Hell, that's not intolerance. Calling us on it, now that's intolerance.

[Anastasia Beaverhausen]

I would simply like to state that I Keith.

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by Rocky

I'm sure Jimmy Carter is. He's actually going to get to move up a spot.

You're a little slow today, Rocky. Jimmy Carter moved up ten spots the day Bush stole the Presidency.

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by Rocky

I don't see how answering his question showed intolerance or hypocrisy from her.

Of course you don't. But then again, you're a failsauce troll.

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by Sauron

You're a little slow today, Rocky. Jimmy Carter moved up ten spots the day Bush stole the Presidency.

And yet Jimmy still ranks last.

[Rocky]

Originally Posted by Watser?

Yes, because when we Christians call you immoral and tell you you will burn in Hell, that's not intolerance. Calling us on it, now that's intolerance.

The point you seem to be missing is that it's usually the left wing of society that is always preaching tolerance, yet they are usually the first to be intolerant if you don't agree with them. So, I guess that's why they get called on it.

[Watser?]

Oh? So all that shrieking we have all been hearing in the past years was not the Catholic League and other fundie outfits wailing about how people are being mean to them?