Well I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose between same sex marriage or opposite marriage, and you know what? In my country, in my family, I think I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised and that's how I think that it should be between a man and a woman.
Miss Prejean is now saying that her answer cost her the crown. She defended herself to Matt Lauer, saying that she lost "because I had spoken from my heart, from my beliefs, and for my God." Come on, America! She was just being honest! She goes on...
It's not about being politically correct, it's about being biblically correct.
I don't have the video at my disposal so I can link to it, but she says "biblically" like you think she would - condescendingly and holier than thou.
Okay lady. I understand that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, that's our right as Americans, as human beings, and it's unfortunate if your opinion involves bigotry, but you still have the right to it.
You didn't win the crown because you didn't answer the question. You gave an answer involving your opinion and your values and YOUR (and the Bible's) definition of marriage. That wasn't the question. The question was whether or not you thought other states should follow Vermont's lead. Now, if you had said something along the lines of "We live in a democracy and the will of the people will prevail," now THAT would have answered the question AND honest at the same time. The uproar over your answer is not because of your beliefs. (Okay, maybe it is.) It is because in your less than 30 second display of brilliance you implied the following:
- That being gay and wanting same-sex marriage is a choice (I understand that she may have meant the choice was same-sex or heterosexual marriage, but uh, it's not, it's only a choice in a handful of states, so she's wrong anyway.)
- That the alienated demographic you just insulted (and their supporters) would excuse your answer and not cry out in anger because you said "no offense to anybody" - it doesn't work that way sister
- That the laws of the country should fundamentally reflect how you were raised and what you and your parents and your family believe
- That Vermont's law (and Iowa's and Connecticut's and Massachusett's) and its residents who voted for it are wrong
And by the way, what the fuck is "opposite marriage"?
If you really want to go all biblical on everybody, since everyone who is opposed to same-sex marriage loves to quote Leviticus, let me recount some other Leviticus "abominations":
- Eating shrimp and lobster (11:10)
- Shaving (19:27)
- Bunnies (11:6)
- Working on Saturday (19:30)
- Eating pork (11:7)
As a good friend of mine has said, "Quote one, quote them all, that's just common sense."
Miss California, I appreciate that you were honest in your answer. I am so tired of beauty queens talking fluff. But just because you're honest doesn't mean you are right or excused. You were raised in a household where marriage is defined as heterosexual - I get that. But there are very many people in the world who were raised in a household where they are taught that all colored people are criminals, that colored people and white people shouldn't marry, the list of bigotry goes on. And as a contender for Miss America, you were in the running to be a representative of our country. I, for one, am infinitely glad that you didn't win. Of course if I read your interview with Matt Lauer correctly, now you think that not winning means God has another purpose for you, and apparently that's to go public with your bigoted beliefs under the ruse of "speaking from the heart."
Thanks for setting the country back a few decades.
By the way, your grammar is atrocious.
3 comments:
awesome. freakin' awesome.
So glad she lost! I'm blonde, but don't have a problem calling her a blonde bimbo.
I should point out that not all all the things Leviticus tells us not to do are "shaketz", traditionally translated as "detestable" or "an abomination." Lying with men as one does with women is so described, as is eating various sorts of non-approved animals, including (as you pointed out) crustaceans and bunnies. But the hair-cutting bit and Sabbath observance isn't listed as "shaketz"; the reason for its prohibition is given in Lev 19:1-2 as "Be ye holy, for I the LORD your God am holy." Not to say the penalty still wasn't death. The penalty for a lot of things in Leviticus was death. Leviticus is kind of the Texas of the Bible that way.
Post a Comment