Miss North Carolina claimed the title of Miss USA, but the spotlight shines on first runner-up Miss California for her bold honesty.
As Carrie Prejean took the stage at the Miss USA Pageant on Sunday night, openly gay celebrity blogger Perez Hilton threw her a hard-hitting question about her feelings on gay marriage. Hilton said, “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit, why or why not?â€Â
Perhaps Hilton should not have withheld the “why notâ€Â part of the question. Maybe then he would have gotten the politically correct answer he was fishing for. Without hesitation, Prejean answered with confidence in herself and her beliefs, taking the opportunity to voice her true opinion on the issue.
She said, “I think it’s great Americans are able to choose one or the other… And you know what? 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 there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be, between a man and a woman.â€Â
Hilton said Prejean should have been more politically correct in her answer and admitted to giving her a score of zero, ultimately costing her the crown. “There are various other ways she could have answered that question and still stayed true to herself without alienating millions of people,â€Â he said. While she could have worded her response more eloquently, if she wanted to say how she really felt, she was going to make some people upset.
Isn̢۪t the idea of the question and answer portion to allow the judges to get to know the contestants? Prejean was punished for being honest, a quality you would think would be desirable in the contestants. If the judges are looking for scripted, politically correct answers rather than an opportunity to learn about the contestant, why even ask the questions?
Prejean, along with the rest of our nation, has the right to her opinions and the right to express them freely. The right to free speech is one of many things that make America the remarkable country that it is. You would think Hilton would agree with me on this since he uses the first amendment to defend the content in his blog. He must only support free speech when it doesn̢۪t contradict his personal world views.
Hilton is hypocritical. He has no problem broadcasting his opinions to the world, but expects Prejean to keep hers to herself simply because he doesn̢۪t agree with them. As an American citizen, he is entitled to express his opinion just as she is entitled to express hers.
Hilton obviously disagrees with Prejean’s views about gay marriage, but also criticized her for not knowing the judges or her audience, giving her no credit for knowing herself. “You have to answer the question as Miss USA, not as Carrie Prejean,â€Â he said.
Since that moment on Sunday, Prejean and Hilton have showed their true colors. Prejean has demonstrated true class, standing behind her response, while Hilton has done the complete opposite, calling Prejean numerous names and portraying her on his website speaking into a crude drawing of a penis.
Prejean could have given the judges a politically correct, rehearsed, cookie-cutter answer and walked away with the top title, but instead, she stood up for what she believes. I applaud her honesty and admire her for not sacrificing her values, morals or opinions to win a crown.
dw • Apr 30, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Hey No More–The real dictator was that midget brain who held the office from 2000 to 2008. Go find a nice deep swamp to fall into. You and your nasty-minded friends sure aren’t liked in this country right now. Get this, less than 30 percent even want to identify themselves as Republicans because the party is filled with mental defectives and wingnuts.
dw • May 1, 2009 at 3:47 am
Hey No More–The real dictator was that midget brain who held the office from 2000 to 2008. Go find a nice deep swamp to fall into. You and your nasty-minded friends sure aren’t liked in this country right now. Get this, less than 30 percent even want to identify themselves as Republicans because the party is filled with mental defectives and wingnuts.
No More Barack • Apr 30, 2009 at 7:21 pm
NA, Katrina, Pat, DW,
don’t even begin to equate interracial marriage with same-sex marriage. That’s using a revisionist form of history that liberals always accuse and hound conservatives for. Like Dictator Obama now getting tough on anti-terror measures adopted soon after the 9-11 attacks. Come on—–you can’t compare this era to that era. If Thomas Jefferson was brought back to life by Obama’s henchmen, would they have him arrested and tried for crimes against humanity because he owned slaves?
No More Barack • May 1, 2009 at 2:21 am
NA, Katrina, Pat, DW,
don’t even begin to equate interracial marriage with same-sex marriage. That’s using a revisionist form of history that liberals always accuse and hound conservatives for. Like Dictator Obama now getting tough on anti-terror measures adopted soon after the 9-11 attacks. Come on—–you can’t compare this era to that era. If Thomas Jefferson was brought back to life by Obama’s henchmen, would they have him arrested and tried for crimes against humanity because he owned slaves?
Pat Murray • Apr 29, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Sorry, Kaley Delarosa. That’s a weak argument you have there. And your quote is incorrect regarding her answer to the question. That’s a crucial basis to your argument, and it’s wrong.
Carrie Prejean didn’t “stand by her convictions,” or give an “honest answer,” or demonstrate “true class,” at all. She began her answer by saying the following (and this is a quote): “I think it’s great we live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what? In my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman.”
That is neither eloquent or accurate. Americans don’t get to choose gay marriage over “opposite marriage.” In only a couple of states is gay marriage allowed. And there is no such thing in this country as “opposite marriage.” That doesn’t even make sense. Furthermore, she has no convictions to stand by. She said, “I think I believe…” Therefore, she doesn’t even KNOW what she believes.
I feel sorry for this beauty contestant. But she didn’t win because Perez Hilton voted against her. She lost because she gave a bad answer. And with her answer, her beauty turned ugly real quick. Pageant veterans also know about scoring: The high and low scores and tossed out, and the others are averaged. So even if Perez gave her the worst score, it was thrown out and not added into her final numbers. Furthermore, she trailed Miss North Carolina in every single other competition throughout the night. NBC flashed the scores throughout the competition and California was trailing all night long.
Pat Murray • Apr 29, 2009 at 10:10 pm
Sorry, Kaley Delarosa. That’s a weak argument you have there. And your quote is incorrect regarding her answer to the question. That’s a crucial basis to your argument, and it’s wrong.
Carrie Prejean didn’t “stand by her convictions,” or give an “honest answer,” or demonstrate “true class,” at all. She began her answer by saying the following (and this is a quote): “I think it’s great we live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what? In my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman.”
That is neither eloquent or accurate. Americans don’t get to choose gay marriage over “opposite marriage.” In only a couple of states is gay marriage allowed. And there is no such thing in this country as “opposite marriage.” That doesn’t even make sense. Furthermore, she has no convictions to stand by. She said, “I think I believe…” Therefore, she doesn’t even KNOW what she believes.
I feel sorry for this beauty contestant. But she didn’t win because Perez Hilton voted against her. She lost because she gave a bad answer. And with her answer, her beauty turned ugly real quick. Pageant veterans also know about scoring: The high and low scores and tossed out, and the others are averaged. So even if Perez gave her the worst score, it was thrown out and not added into her final numbers. Furthermore, she trailed Miss North Carolina in every single other competition throughout the night. NBC flashed the scores throughout the competition and California was trailing all night long.
r • Apr 26, 2009 at 5:05 pm
First, here’s a quick lesson on free speech: a person can value free speech without valuing what other people believe. Through free speech, a member of the KKK can say, or write whatever they believe to be true. That doesn’t mean everyone will applaud their values. Similarly, Hilton may value Miss. California’s RIGHT to say what she wants, he simply didn’t agree with what she said.
Second, as a Californian, you may remember the controversy surrounding Prop 8. Sure, it passed, but only by 2.24%, meaning that about 47% of Californians support same-sex marriage. Hilton, AS ONE OF A NUMBER OF JUDGES, simply gave her a score that many other supporters of same-sex marriage would have given her. And he said that his score for her wasn’t just because she was against same sex marriage, but because she was dumb. The part of her response that you “cleverly” omitted in your article included the words, “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage.” Really? America is a land where you can just choose same-sex marriage if you want to have it? Oh Miss. California….
I really hope you start to take your job as a journalist seriously. I’ve read some well-argued op/ed in the past, that i may not have agreed with, but i certainly respected. Your articles on calorie counting and the new telephone system were decent, perhaps you might want to stick to those while you work on your skills in argumentation.
r • Apr 27, 2009 at 12:05 am
First, here’s a quick lesson on free speech: a person can value free speech without valuing what other people believe. Through free speech, a member of the KKK can say, or write whatever they believe to be true. That doesn’t mean everyone will applaud their values. Similarly, Hilton may value Miss. California’s RIGHT to say what she wants, he simply didn’t agree with what she said.
Second, as a Californian, you may remember the controversy surrounding Prop 8. Sure, it passed, but only by 2.24%, meaning that about 47% of Californians support same-sex marriage. Hilton, AS ONE OF A NUMBER OF JUDGES, simply gave her a score that many other supporters of same-sex marriage would have given her. And he said that his score for her wasn’t just because she was against same sex marriage, but because she was dumb. The part of her response that you “cleverly” omitted in your article included the words, “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage.” Really? America is a land where you can just choose same-sex marriage if you want to have it? Oh Miss. California….
I really hope you start to take your job as a journalist seriously. I’ve read some well-argued op/ed in the past, that i may not have agreed with, but i certainly respected. Your articles on calorie counting and the new telephone system were decent, perhaps you might want to stick to those while you work on your skills in argumentation.
Katrina Garcia • Apr 24, 2009 at 1:45 pm
dw is right.
You say you’d think honesty would be a desirable trait in a Miss USA contestant. I agree.
But you’re forgetting about other traits such as eloquence, grace and compassion — things Miss California clearly lacks. Just because she “kept it real” and spoke her mind doesn’t make her a winner. Last time I checked, a person doesn’t deserve a gold medal (or a crown, in this case) simply for giving an opinion, especially when that sentiment is discriminatory and diminishes the love two people have for each other. “True class?” You are mistaken.
Katrina Garcia • Apr 24, 2009 at 8:45 pm
dw is right.
You say you’d think honesty would be a desirable trait in a Miss USA contestant. I agree.
But you’re forgetting about other traits such as eloquence, grace and compassion ”” things Miss California clearly lacks. Just because she “kept it real” and spoke her mind doesn’t make her a winner. Last time I checked, a person doesn’t deserve a gold medal (or a crown, in this case) simply for giving an opinion, especially when that sentiment is discriminatory and diminishes the love two people have for each other. “True class?” You are mistaken.
dw • Apr 24, 2009 at 12:40 pm
Perez Hilton did the right thing, given the rules–which didn’t say a judge had to agree with the answer. She gave her opinion, wasn’t told to shut up, and Perez did what he felt he needed to do. No one’s “freedom of speech” was violated. In fact, there was no “freedom of speech” issue raised since this was a privately-organized event with no government participation.
dw • Apr 24, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Perez Hilton did the right thing, given the rules–which didn’t say a judge had to agree with the answer. She gave her opinion, wasn’t told to shut up, and Perez did what he felt he needed to do. No one’s “freedom of speech” was violated. In fact, there was no “freedom of speech” issue raised since this was a privately-organized event with no government participation.
wazzaaa • Apr 24, 2009 at 12:13 pm
I strongly agree with this article…. she deserves credit for being honest…… i think we live in a world of walking on egg shells say how you feel about something and be honest, not more cookie cutter b.s.
wazzaaa • Apr 24, 2009 at 7:13 pm
I strongly agree with this article…. she deserves credit for being honest…… i think we live in a world of walking on egg shells say how you feel about something and be honest, not more cookie cutter b.s.
N.A. • Apr 24, 2009 at 12:04 pm
The underlying concern that was noted by the author, is that ‘Free Speech’ is what’s really at stake here. Miss California was given a 0 by an infamous celebrity judge because her answer didn’t agree with his one-sided opinions. Since when did all of our opinions need to align? Clearly, Hilton likes the idea of open-mindedness as long as it is fits into his pre-determined “open-mindedness”. He even went as far to say that her answer should have conformed to that which would be representative of “Miss USA”… I wasn’t aware that Miss USA had specified ideologies that needed to conform to his lack of self-confidence.
N.A. • Apr 24, 2009 at 7:04 pm
The underlying concern that was noted by the author, is that ‘Free Speech’ is what’s really at stake here. Miss California was given a 0 by an infamous celebrity judge because her answer didn’t agree with his one-sided opinions. Since when did all of our opinions need to align? Clearly, Hilton likes the idea of open-mindedness as long as it is fits into his pre-determined “open-mindedness”. He even went as far to say that her answer should have conformed to that which would be representative of “Miss USA”… I wasn’t aware that Miss USA had specified ideologies that needed to conform to his lack of self-confidence.
EWW • Apr 24, 2009 at 7:44 am
why was the gay (i mean guy) a celebrity judge anyway? How does blogging make someone a celebrity? Everyone has an opinion, just because you can use a keyboard and post that opinion and gossip online, you are somehow more relevant in the public eye and get called on to judge a once respectable event? Our notion of ‘celebrity’ has taken a turn for the worse—-of it’s been bad, but now—–
EWW • Apr 24, 2009 at 2:44 pm
why was the gay (i mean guy) a celebrity judge anyway? How does blogging make someone a celebrity? Everyone has an opinion, just because you can use a keyboard and post that opinion and gossip online, you are somehow more relevant in the public eye and get called on to judge a once respectable event? Our notion of ‘celebrity’ has taken a turn for the worse—-of it’s been bad, but now—–
João Paulo • Apr 24, 2009 at 2:10 am
If the question was: “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize marriage between blacks and whites. Do you think every state should follow suit, why or why not?” would everybody be ok if she said no due to “personal beliefs”?
João Paulo • Apr 24, 2009 at 9:10 am
If the question was: “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize marriage between blacks and whites. Do you think every state should follow suit, why or why not?” would everybody be ok if she said no due to “personal beliefs”?