Should Carrie Prejean have been stripped of her Miss California title?

How did Vanessa Williams' pictures, which show simulated lesbian oral sex, get equated with topless photos? Personally, I dig both sets of photos, but they certainly aren't the same level of prurience!

She gave a morally defensible position on a controversial topic after being blindsided by a publicity-seeking no-talent blogger. It was just a few years ago, Trump himself allowed a Miss USA to keep her title despite breaking several parts of her contract WHILE she was serving.

She's being attacked and investigated for her opinion, without Hilton's rage-filled rant the next day (simply because she disagreed with HIS position on the subject) this would have ended on the stage that evening.

I am sorry, but a lot of young girls today still look up to the pagent world. Is someone who breaks rules, poses naked and uses the pagent for her own personal agenda someone for the girls growing up to be looking up to?

I don't know about you, but I think that she is just trying to get as much of her 15 minutes of fame that she can. Not to mention the free boob job.

What a bunch of crap! You put young women out there and pretend that they are actually being judged for something other than their body, (the pageant people even buy her fake boobs!) and then have the nerve to say that what most of us would call pretty tame Victoria Secret type modelling pics is somehow equated with improper values?!?!?!?

What a bunch of hypocritical garbage! I do not agree with her at all on her stance and feel that she has no right to automatically equate christian faith with being against gay marriage. But, that whole question was a political set up by a gay judge who had an axe to grind. It never should have been an issue, and I could not care less what her opinion or beliefs are.

Give me a break on the holier than thou coming from both sides of the judgemental aisle. It is only a bunch of losers even making this an issue. Even more so for even thinking this is even remotely important!

Now in my opinion, I think the pictures of her "modeling" are much prettier than the pageant pics. She didn't need the fakes. Even her face looked plastic in the pageant pics.

I don't understand why this keeps going back to the gay marriage issue. She took nude photos and could be removed for it. Vanessa Williams was removed for the same reason. I don't actually think she should be removed, since the pageant admits to having bought her breast implants. How can they play the morality card now? Should little girls look up to large silicon breasts, but not be allowed to use them for pictures?

As far as the Gay Marriage issue goes: I actually respect the fact that she spoke her mind when asked her opinion on Gay Marriage. She was asked for her opinion after all, and it's refreshing that she was honest when so few are in such a competition. I'm gay and I can still respect other people's right to their own views. I think Perez Hilton should be ashamed of the way he behaved afterward. He makes all gay people look like we expect rights and tolerance that we don't reserve for others.

If they take her crown because of these pictures they need to redo the swimsuit they parade around in because it's just as revealing. Also, who is the gay that paid to get the picture in the first place. PEREZ is a discussing bully as well as a gay.

You apparently never saw the vanessa williams pics! There is a big difference between the hint of booby in these pics and Vanessa doing a full blown face plant in some other girls HOO-HOO! This is not about the pics though it is about how dare this women have an opinion about abortion or same sex marraige that doesn't toe the liberal line.

really on Vanessa Williams what a hog

This is all "straight hate". It seems to me, you are hated if you are straight.

(no matter how cute your a&* is).

It's about her breaching her contract in several different ways and not being suitable to keep the position. The rest of us get fired for breaching our employment contracts, no matter what our "opinions" are.

As for "straight hate"...you must realize how ridiculous that is. Gays make up somewhere between 4 and 10 % of the population, depending on what "news" network you watch, yet the support for gay rights and gay marriage is hovering around 45-55% of the population. Obviously there are a lot of straight people who don't happen to think "anyone who doesn't do "it" like me, doesn't deserve the same rights as I do".

It's hatred of discrimination. Of mindless, groundless, baseless withholding of basic rights enjoyed by everyone else. If your religion tells you not to have gay sex, then don't have it...no one will ever force you to. No one is interfering in YOUR religious freedom to not have gay sex or enter into a gay marriage. So don't tell other people what to do, because then you are trampling THEIR religious rights.

It's that constant interference in what OTHER people do that is behind the backlash against Christianity. If you simply practiced what you believed and allowed others the same respect, there would be no problem. It's the trying to change laws to force other people to live according to your beliefs that creates resentment and anger and makes Christianity look more political and militant than spiritual and loving.

The pictures of Vanessa Williams were WAY more "risque" than these photos are and included her in erotic poses with another woman. From what I can see, Ms. Prejean did not completely expose herself. They are suggestive photos, but not erotic.

Seems to me the gay community is just as bigoted, hateful, and vendetta-seeking as they accuse the conservatives of being.

NotKidding - You're right, it IS about the intolerance and lack of respect for differing opinions. However, it's really about differing from the "party line" of support of gay marriage. The truly "intolerant" ones are those who preach the hate toward conservatives and Christians. You pander to a group that by you own admission only represents some where between 4 and 10% of the population, demanding "rights" for them. Why is this? Why not show respect you demand for the 10% for the 53% of CA voters who voted against Prop 8?You state that 45-55% support gay marriage, yet every time it's on a ballot, it gets defeated. You, and many like you, then turn to courts to get in that arena what can not be achieved at the ballot box. Yet, if the opposite were true, you would DEMAND that the "will of the people" be accepted. And you call other hypocrites. You call us "far right extremists" simply because we disagree with you. Well, if that's the case, are you a "far left extremists"?

And Lynda - Your visceral comparison of a picture of a young woman who is topless, but has a arm modestly over her breasts to full frontal nudity with simulated lesbian sex scenes would be like comparing Marylin Chamber work in the Ivory Snow commercials to her staring in "Behind the Green Door". The dismissal of Vanessa Williams, while tragic and possibly wrong, had NOTHING to do with race, and any one who wishes to rehash this issue so many years later is just being what is recently called a "race baiter". If you had taken the time to look at both sets of pictures, not the digitally altered ones trying to make hay out of nothing that NBC put on TV, but the un-retouched ones available on many internet sites, you would see the difference. This young lady is being hounded SOLEY because she gave an opinion contrary to the views of the "celebrity" judge. What if a picture of that person on a date with a woman surfaced? Would his credibility in the "gay" community be breached?

A Typical TRump screwup! Contracts mean nothing today. Apparently signing a contract means nothing to TRUMPASS! This must be how he got his money signing meaningless contracts.

All the nay sayers are obviously not very religious. The homosexual lifestyle is gross and it CLEARLY states in the Bible that the gay/lesbian lifestyle is not acceptable to God. I have personally known and have been friends with both gays and lesbians, BUT that does not mean I agree with their sexual preferences. Miss California was standing up for what she believes in. What only gays and lesbians have the right to express their feelings? Give me a break!Thank the lord for Carrie!

I'm hesitant on the lies. But then, who can remember what they did at 17 on a spur of the moment?

I wish they would have straightened out the gay marriage thing, but it wouldn't matter. Someone would ignore it and make it into something else. There are extremists insisting she means she hates gays. That's not what she said. She was raised to believe that MARRIAGE is between a man and a woman. Everyone is free to chose. Why is it so hard that husband and wife want to keep the word, the meaning of marriage as it always has been because it's special to them the way it is?

I believe gays and lesbians should be able to officially become a couple. A family. And many others do. But the problem many people are having is with the word marriage itself. Union, bonding...whatever else it can be called, it can be made to become legal. Marriage to many means Husband and Wife.

Make it whatever you will, it is NOT being a bigot, or hate mongering. I have family and friends who are straight, gay, lesbian, bi. None of them agree with the problems California is getting into. In fact, most think the celebrities like Perez Hilton are making the whole community look bad.

BTW, everyone knows why the photos surfaced. Can you remember everything you've ever done? She lied...maybe. Did she realize she did at the time? Did she remember, or think private photos not authorized for public would come out? YOU DON'T KNOW. Really, if Trump wants to keep this from happening in the future they'd redo that little clause to include certain types of photos as ok. Let's face it, we see stuff like that all the time now. My JCPenny catalog has a couple pages with women in panties while their arms are covering their bared chests.

On the other hand, if Trump took away the crown there would be a huge outcry of yet another person having their freedom of speech taken away. After all, that was what started it.

Um, what about selling your body? With or without clothes on?

There was a HUGE difference in the pictures that dethroned Ms. Williams and the ones of Carrie Prejean.

This is all because she spoke up against gay marriage.

I am so tired of the gay/lesbian/trans/bi community clamoring that they want the same rights as heterosexuals. They already have the same rights as I and any other heterosexual couple has. I do not know of any heterosexual that can marry a person of the same gender in the majority of the United States, except in 4(?) states.

Let's tell it the way it really is. The gay/lesbian/trans/bi community want special rights. They want special laws for them, which govern and are only for them.

Good for Carrie Prejean for speaking out for what she believes in. Such a pity the small minds of the ones that preach about being so open and tolerant, cannot tolerate an opposing view. Good for Donald Trump for seeing this as what it really is.

As for gay unions, like Trace-1098681, I have no problem with that. I think it is important that everyone have access to the same benefits as all. I just don't agree with calling it marriage, which is a term more based in religion than law anyway.

let me guess...you happen to be black...?

The pictures which surfaced from Vanessa were completely different than those posted on Miss California. Vanessa posed for nude photos, and she was posing in a suggestive way. These photo of Miss California were not suggestive, nor was she nude. Further, the photographer took the photos of her chest in between takes, without her knowledge or permission.

Bob,

You said: "NotKidding, You're right, it IS about the intolerance and lack of respect for differing opinions..."

I respect your opinion if you don't want to enter into a gay marriage. I respect the opinions of those who do. I would not want to force you to do something you don't agree with, nor try to prevent others from doing something simply because I don't agree with it.

The majority alone should never determine what is just or legal. I was pointing out that around half the people in the country have no problem with gay marriage, and they aren't all gays so it isn't simply a matter of "straight hate" as someone else felt. What the majority thinks or feels isn't the issue. Our government was wisely set up to prevent mob rule from trampling the rights of the minority. Otherwise we'd still have slavery and interracial taboo's and child labor and no women voting and all sorts of things that the majority at one time thought were just and fair and even biblical. All these things were strongly supported by "ethical traditionalists" and all sorts of doom was predicted that never came about. Gay marriage rights are no different. All of our country's growing up has come at a price. In most cases, we've been forced to give up some highly prized ignorance.

There is no harm to others in allowing gay marriage. There is demonstrable harm to the gays who want to marry by preventing it. There just isn't any defensible reason to disallow it and bit by bit the laws of the land are having to admit the only objections to gay marriage are based on opinions, discomfort, tradition, religion, etc...and not on any genuine harm.

For people who honestly believe gay marriage is a bad thing, they don't see the blatant discrimination behind their feelings. They have to feel that gays are less deserving, not as "good" or as fully human as the rest of us in order to feel justified in their opinon that they don't deserve to marry. We all know it's not about having children....lots of married people don't have kids, and we don't all divorce the second our biological clocks stop ticking. And we know it's not "protecting the sanctity of marriage" in a country that has a 50% divorce rate and "Who wants to marry a Millionaire". It's obvious from those ridiculously flimsy "excuses" that there really is no good reason not to allow gay marriage. There just isn't. The fact some people are uncomfortable with it, or don't believe in it, just isn't a good enough reason to withhold it from everyone else.

I realize it's "in the bible" but so are a zillion other things that have been left by the road a long time ago. If you hang on to this one thing while ignoring all the rest, then you can no longer (truthfully) use the bible as your justification. You either believe and follow it or you don't. If you do, then stone your children to death for being rude and marry your half sister and sleep with her maid if you want. Nothing in bible says gay marriage is wrong, it says to kill any man who lies with another as with a woman. Obviously christians aren't out killing gays so they don't really believe they are supposed to literally do what the bible says. It's just their excuse to marginalize them. They might ask themselves why.

When people try to enact laws to discriminate against a group that makes them, personally, uncomfortable it becomes a problem. Where is the personal responsibility for dealing with your own feelings? Why do you think you have the right to withhold something valuable and important from others when the only effect it has on you is how you happen to feel about it?

As for Prejean, they've had to create a special title for her runner up so she can do the job Prejean is refusing to do. Amazing. The professionally taken, obviously posed topless pictures of her on the beach were all taken without her knowledge while she was on "a break" from a modeling shoot? Putting aside the obvious lie...she is accustomed to hanging out on the beach topless while looking directly at clicking cameras during her breaks, but she wears clothes for the shoot? Please. Oh...and now Perez was acting for Satan and God actually spoke to Prejean when she was asked the question. Funny she didn't mention that earlier...sort of a big deal having God talking to you, isn't it? It just gets weirder and weirder. She can brazenly lie over and over, she can cheat, she can take her pay and her title but refuse to do her job, she can exploit the pagaent in any way she wants, she can break her contract a dozen times over...and she won't be fired...because she's the new mascot for Christian "morality".

It all makes a beautiful kind of sense.

This is the Miss USA pageant. Vanessa Williams was in the Miss America pageant. Two entirely different programs. Why have a gay man judge a ladies beauty pageant anyway? Go Miss California!!

That's right !!!!! My first thought was of Vanessa Williams also. And Vanessa's breast were not paid for by the pageant like Prejean. who refused to disuss it. She has no problem deliberating on other subjects unless there about herself. What a true Christian Ha! That stone need to be cast back at her.

You do have a point Phil. Why did they do that. Hmmmmmmmmmmm. I think I smell a rat. I think I'm going to do some research and find out why a gay man would be ask to judge something he genetically finds repulsive. It really doesn't make sense does it! He really is, maybe the worst possible candidate to judge female beauty unless he is aspiring to be just like those he's judging. Hmmmm, maybe I'm on to something here or maybe just on something. LOL

I agree with you 100%, when you watch or talk about the pageant sometimes you think about your daughters that they may someday hold that title, but you don't want them to get the wrong idea. I guess they are no longer expected to be ROLE MODELS for young girls. If that's the case then strippers should be allowed to participate in the pageant. What's this that the pageant paid for breast implants, Hey what happen to the rules that they had to keep it as real as possible,? Then any one who's not happy with their bodies all they have to do is to get into the pageants and they'll pay for anything to get fixed......

They have women and former pageant winners judging too...are they lesbians? Or is it possible to judge beauty, poise, intelligence and charm in others without wanting to have sex with them?

Amazing how much mindless gay-hating passes for discussion here. You people should hear yourselves. It sounds like you like to bash gays just to feel superior...to something. Don't you realize it has the opposite effect?

Prejean is a perfect role model for the youth of today. A narcissistic siliconed, lying, cheating, soft porn, gay hating Christian. We need more like her. Oh yeah.

Prejean sends a bad message to all potential beauty queens and young girls everywhere that you can break the rules and get away with it wihout consequence or conscience.

I don't agree with her, but she still has the right to her opinion. This is America, after all. We all have the inalienable right to hold whatever opinions we like (no matter how foolish or ill-considered), and we all hold the inalienable right to poke fun at people who hold foolish, ill-considered opinions, point out flaws in their reasoning, etc.

Im simply amazed at the viciousness being spewed out at Miss PreJean. She is not only being attacked verbally, the liberals are trying to destroy her so she never shows her face again in public. She has absolutely nothing to be ashamed of or afraid of. Then the gays talk about tolerance. I see absolutely no tolerance from them, just filthy venom spewing from their mouths.

LyndaWill, you're an idiot ! ! I doubt you even viewed the pictures of Ms/ Prejean, I've seen more skin walking through the Mall. Just because you are unable to wear similar clothing and look as good, don't get mad at Ms. Prejean. She was ask a question and she responded honestly in accordance with her beliefs. I think the citizens of California would want their State Represented by a person that had brains, looks good (with all the beaches in California), and stood by her beliefs. It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with her reply on Gay Marriage, she has a right to her opinion. It was Hilton who was out of line, and should be sued by Ms. Prejean. Prejean should also sue the Ms. America Pagent for violating her right of Free Speech ! ! !

To NotKidding - i don't believe California wants to be known as the Gay Capital of America, there are people that live in California who are not gay but apparently you are not one of them. Personally, I think marriage should be between a man & a women but I will not crucify someone who supports Gay Marriage. If need be, I would support their right to voice their opinion.

If it is OK for the pagent comittee to pay for implants for her it is OK for her to appear in the photos that were taken and even to appear nude if she wants.

Seems to me that, since 53% of CA voters voted against same sex marriage, she IS representing the values and standards of the voters of her state, and not the media and celebrity inspired hype.

It doesn't matter whether she is opposed to same sex marriage or not. I do not agree with Miss California on that issue, but we are both entitled to our opinions. As for the photos, who cares. This is 2009 people. Grow up.

I have this twisted, weird view of the world in which white people and black people are held to the same standard.

Now, I know that's weird, and I know most of you feel that white hotties get to keep their beauty crown and that black hotties don't get to keep their crown,and you have that right to feel that way.

However, that's racism and I am proudly against racism.

They should all be able to keep their crowns as they are all selling their bodies one way or another. There is just a degree to which they do it. Let's be reasonable here. Women are not put on Earth to sell their bodies on television. If you're strutting around in a bikini and you're getting judged for it, it's a bit like meat.

You guys are so pathetic. You don't care that she lied to get the contract, then lied about being a minor at the time of the shoot when the photos surfaced. As long as she shares with your personal bigotry nothing else matters. Nothing quite like born-again exceptionalism, except nazi exceptionalism, zionist exceptionalism, ku klux klan exceptionalism...

People who think that something about them makes it OK to persecute or oppress others have no religion and honor no faith. They may call themselves Christians, but they worship at the temple of Satan.

Larry you are pathetic. I suspect you are also a closet case, but that, like Perez Hilton in this case, is beside the point. The bimbo should lose her crown because she violated the contract that she, not Mr. Hilton, signed. She not only violated her contract, but then lied about it and tried to blame some one else for it. Some Christian she is. You can commiserate with her in Hell, but for now both of you should just crawl back under your respective rocks. As for mema, doesn't matter who digs the dirt up or why, the problem is that the dirt exists when she signed an agreement that it did not.

The probability that Prejean was the only contestant to have taken similar photos is remote. Let's face it, these women are beautiful and that alone equates to being photographed. If the pro-marriage-for-gays organizations and the media had a compelling reason to find similar photos  of other contestants, they will find them.

I guess that's the problem with breaking rules, aside from being wrong, it will eventually be brought to light by someone "out to get you." Don't break the rules and the pro-marriage-for-gays will have nothing to use against you when you pretend to be a "holier than thou" true Christian to prevent them from equal rights.

well, if they had taken her crown, I would expect them to check on the rest of the contestants.

why are people so afraid of nudity? We're born that way. Duh.

I'm thrilled that white women can pose naked and keep their crown and that black women can't.

It's about time that someone put a stop to equal treatment!

The pictures which surfaced from Vanessa were completely different than those posted on Miss California. Vanessa posed for nude photos, and she was posing in a suggestive way. These photo of Miss California were not suggestive, nor was she nude. Further, the photographer took the photos of her chest in between takes, did so without her knowledge or permission. And, I also dream of a time when we are all treated the same. So, if I have a GPA of 4.5 and want to go to Berkley, they won't turn me away because they have to make room for a black, latino, or another ethnic group to satisfy their state requirements even if their GPA is lower than mine.

EXACTLY! They're already baring the meat. Who cares if two more inches come off for the titillation of everyone? They are ALREADY compromised. Lots of beautiful women go to college and don't strut around in bikinis.

Maybe you ought to revist YOUR Bible.

Man shalt not lay with man as he lays with a woman.

Of course, people can do whatever they want, God gave us free will, so if you want to be gay, more power to you!

And a little loophole, don't be gay laying down, lol.

Oh, and it also never says anything about women.

So lesbians and standing up gays are ok Biblically.

If you going to quote the Bible, get it right. It says that neither homosexuals, nor thieves, nor murders, shall inherit the kingdom of heaven.  She should not be dethorned because of her views, she was asked a question and she answered it . If hilton did'nt like her answer , he should'nt of asked it.  The pictures were taken while she was still a minor, her gave permission for her to take them. they are the ones at fault.  and why was hilton even asked to a judge at a beauty pageant , that was the first mistake.  

You need to revisit YOUR Bible. I promise you, you wont find the word homosexual any where in there. It also says that its ok to mary your cousin. Kill the first born of an entire nation if they don't agree with you. That women on their period should be separated from men until they become clean again. And that absolutely nothing should be done on the sabbath. Yet how many of you go to church on sundays? Or do a little work? Or cook? No sin is greater then an others. That's also in your bible. Judge not lest ye be judged. Also in your bible.

She lied repeatedly and defamed herself publicly. Both sins. Both equal to being gay in the eyes of your God. She deserves to lose her crown. She broke the Legal Contract she signed and thus is bound most face the fruits she sowed

Does being a GOOD christian mean advocating the deprivation of civil liberties because some people don't agree with you or share your religious beliefs?

If you want to stand up and bash gays or applaud others for doing so, please leave Christ out of it. The jews betrayal of Christ only cost his mortal body. It's the PHONEY christians who have betrayed his teachings and seem dedicated to destroying his message.

candyce implose you are right they are called SODOMITES and god destroyed 2 cities because they were perverted beyond repentence,not only women were unclean but any one who touched human blood was unclean.

g scott every since 1776 homos were not accepted do a little reading most states still have laws on the books concerning SODOMY and the jews were allowed to betray Christ so he could wash away your sins and if you believe in christ you would know that two (same sex)people only do it for pleasure they cannot propagate it is impossible

candyce implose you are right they are called SODOMITES and god destroyed 2 cities because they were perverted beyond repentence,not only women were unclean but any one who touched human blood was unclean.

g scott every since 1776 homos were not accepted do a little reading most states still have laws on the books concerning SODOMY and the jews were allowed to betray Christ so he could wash away your sins and if you believe in christ you would know that two (same sex)people only do it for pleasure they cannot propagate it is impossible

Why do you presume your deities have any validity over others? Why do you violate the very tenets of your faith with your post?

Along with being homophobic, you are rather anti-Semite to boot aren't you? No one betrayed your demi-deity, you cannot betray that which never existed in the first place.

It is not homophobic to disapprove of homosexuality. The term homophobic is a term that has been made up by the homosexual community to get sympathy. Its literal meaning would be "an unreasonable fear of mankind" not dislike or disapproval of homosexual activity.

and if you believe in christ you would know that two (same sex)people only do it for pleasure they cannot propagate it is impossible

So Shawn, by your argument; if a man has had a vasectomy or a woman has had a tubal ligation or historectomy, then they should not be allowed to have sex because there will be no child from that union??? WOW!!! What about masterbation??

Because of your statement you have just condemned countless millions of people to burn forever in hell. God gave us many gifts. Everybody agrees on this point. Right? God gave us the knowledge between good and evil. This is a very important gift. Another gift God gave us was pleasure. Enough so that procreation became recreation. And it is killing the Earth. We are running out of resources faster then we can replenish them. All because we are so many. The Earth is being drowned in children that have no food, no clean water to drink, no decent medical help. And yet you want to stop all sex everywhere if it is not for the purpose of creating children.

If we have more people of your moral fiber we would be hip deep in our own waste. No quality of life, or food to eat.

And no, I am not gay. But I have no problem with anyone wanting a little happyness. It is a small thing that makes life easier to bear. We can all use more happyness! Some people get happy watching their children grow up, others by watching sports, still more by being close to the one they love. There is nothing wrong with being happy.

"It is not homophobic to disapprove of homosexuality. The term homophobic is a term that has been made up by the homosexual community to get sympathy. Its literal meaning would be "an unreasonable fear of mankind" not dislike or disapproval of homosexual activity."

Oh bull@!$%#. Look up the term in the APA's DSM.

Actually, since "phobia" is from the Greek, if you take the Greek meaning of "homo" (same) it literally means "fear of the same". Not too bad since we are all essentially the same, wanting the same things from life...love, family, shelter, support....despite some differences in how those things might look. If you take the Latin of homo (man) and the Greek phobia (fear) then you get fear of man.

Etymologically it's not terribly accurate, either way. But since it was first coined to mean a fear of homosexuality, then that's the meaning we all understand it to have. That fear is often "concealed" as religious belief or social intolerance, but at the root of all disapproval there is likely some unacknowledged fear. Maybe just fear that the "gay agenda" will prevail, or that their own opinion will be shown to be unpopular in the long run...but that's still fear.

Being homophobic...or, if you prefer, "disapproving" of homosexuality, is certainly within anyone's right. No one is forcing you to approve of, or embrace anything you don't want to. No one is interfering in your life, or your right to pursue happiness in your own way.

However...those who "disapprove" aren't happy with their freedoms. They want to force everyone else to go along with their disapproval too, (by enacting laws and ammendments) no matter how others feel about it. They want to interfere in the lives and pursuit of happiness of people they've never met. They want to be the "thought police" that want to force the rest of us into not being able to treat all human beings with the same amount of respect and dignity...simply because they happen to disapprove of some of them. They justify this outrageous, indefensible bigotry by saying that we are somehow trampling their 'right' to legally marginalize and discriminate against a group they don't like. Insane.

Notkidding - what you wrote goes both ways.

However...those who "approve" aren't happy with their freedoms. They want to force everyone else to go along with their approval too, (by enacting laws and ammendments) no matter how others feel about it. They want to interfere in the lives and pursuit of happiness of people they've never met. They want to be the "thought police" that want to force the rest of us into not being able to treat all human beings with the same amount of respect and dignity...simply because they happen to approve of some of them. They justify this outrageous, indefensible "freedom" by saying that we are somehow trampling their 'right' to legally marginalize and discriminate against a group they don't like. Insane.

Be loud. Be proud.

The question Hilton placed into the draw should have been rejected as soon as it went in and never asked. Wrong venue! Get enough resourceful people who are outraged against someone's OPINION and dirt gets dug up. I would love to see Hilton go through the lashing (s)he's caused Prejean to go through. I am surprised the real Hilton family doesn't get a judge to tell him to cease and desist using their family name!

NY2LV,

There was nothing wrong with the question...or the answer. It's controversial...so there are heated feelings on both sides....have been for years. This is nothing new.

All the contestants are asked questions, it's part of their competition. The point is to see if they can think on their feet and give an intelligent answer. Even though she is from a state that has been publically battling this issue for a decade, and even though she was answering a question from an openly gay judge on national TV, she chose to express her very own personal religious opinion rather than make any effort to actually try and represent her state. Fine. Who cares?

She could have answered a dozen different ways without lying and without being divisive, but she didn't think fast enough. Now she tells us that Satan was speaking through Perez and God told her to say that. Sure. Whatever.

The "Hilton family" and there are thousands...don't "own" the name. That's just...well....silly. I'm sure as a gay man, Hilton has gone through his own share of "lashing" even before this event...I have no doubt he's gotten significantly more since then.

The little model of decency that you defend is a proven liar and a cheat. Her opinion of gay marriage is only important in light of her job to represent the people of the state of California...some of whom have a different opinion. She chose not to consider them in her answer, and that's just fine. Her right and all that. No one really cares what she thinks.

Just as it is Perez Hilton's right to say what HE thinks. He didn't like what she said, she didn't like what he said...I didn't like what either of them said...but there are no ignorance clauses on free speech.

She should be fired because she's violated her contract many times over and because she's refusing to do the job. The rest of us get fired when we don't do our job...no matter what our opinions are. Isn't this reverse religious discrimination? She can lie cheat and steal but keep her job as long as she invokes the bible? Hmmmm.

According to the way California voted, her opinion is with the majority of the state, so her representation of the state is appropriate. Now, I suppose if she were Miss San Francisco, her reply as a representative would have been different. But San Francisco is not the only city in California.

The Hilton family name is exactly what he is riding on. Perez Hilton... gee what does that sound like? It's time to end his 15 minutes of piggy back fame.

So, what part exactly did she violate in the contract? The California pageant reps don't seem to be taking the next step for a contract violation. Do YOU have a copy of the contract? I would think they do and they are doing nothing.

Pageant officials and Donald Trump, who owns the pageant, have decided the photos do not violate the intent of the contract, so that issue is settled.

If this is not your belief, you must be one of those fruit cakes...... You are right, she does have a right to her beliefs and she has the right to answer that question just as she did. Thank God there is some straight ones left in this world.

The track record for divorce as of 2008 is now 60%.

If miss Ca should keep her opinions to herself, the question should not be asked, and the judge should be reprimanded for his descriminating against a free speech opinion

Divorce rates like her opinion means nothing to those who support gay marriage. It is only one more fact that they will turn to get their way. Divorce involves people. Gay marriage also involves people. Does anyone want to predict the divorce rate that will carry. Higher rates are my guess. At this point we will never hear that argument again. She should lose the crown on breech of contract if those are the facts. She should also be crowned as honorable for not giving up principles over popularity of political corruption of this country. As to anyone who thinks that being a Christian is to be perfect. Get a clue !!! It seems to me in all that I have read from the Bible. It is publicly admitting being anything but and far from perfect. (One more fact they dare not recognize. They would have to remove the word HYPOCRITE from their vocabulary.)

I really don't know that one is ENTITLED to bigoted, hateful beliefs. At the very least, I don't think they should be spreading them. In a perfect world, they wouldn't believe in discrimination either, though...

A perfect world will be when Jesus comes again and no there will not be any gays. The Bible explains this in detail, why do you think God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, because of homosexuals and rampent sin. Why are we always discrimanated against for speaking our beliefs , but gays can say what they want, sounds like a double standard to me. I pray this country will wake up for their own sake before Jesus comes again and you are left behind.

I'll be happy to be l'eft behind', as long as it's not where YOU idiots are...

You might want to revisit the CENSUS records. 50% of marriages ending in divorce is not the same as 50% of people getting divorced.

Many people have more than one marriage. The polls don't tell the whole story. Since this is California and the movie industry is big there----Reference Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward's marriage against Elizabeth Taylor's multiple serial marriages. Ms. Taylor is responsible for more marriages than the other couple. Do not compare apples and oranges.

Homosexuality is a mental health issue like many other issues. People need to stop stereotyping and discriminating mental health sufferers.

Neither should politicians, contestants be expected to give "sound-bite issues" to complex questions for whatever reason in public that do not do justice to complex issues.

However, that lady as many other people, does not get it. This is not a religious moral issue but a health, especially mental health issue. People who are homosexual or have ADD or whatever (the neurological components may be similar) are often misunderstood.

Extremists on both sides are more of a problem than a solution. Henry Nouwen was an important Christian theologan and Catholic priest...and he was also a homosexual.

Brittany1085879 -- she did not "invalidate" the contract and the contract is not "invalidated". The contract is now voidable not invalidated. Additionally, Ms. California was ASKED the question and she answered it. She didn't just start spouting out her beliefs without a question being asked of her. With respect to your comments about discremination against gays, trust me I have felt discremination from gays and those who support the gay agenda. I have no hatred towards gays, in fact, my daughter is a lesbian, and I lover her dearly. She agrees with me that there are quite a few gay people who are hostile and down right threatening to anyone who does not knuckle under to their way of thinking. Wake up my dear and smell the roses, we ALL have right to our beliefs and we ALL have a right to vote our conscience. Your statements seek to take away my rights regarding both. Good luck to you and I hope that one day you become as tolerant of me as I am of you.

"Homosexuality is a mental health issue like many other issues. People need to stop stereotyping and discriminating mental health sufferers."

Homosexuality does NOT appear in the list of disorders recognised in the DSM of the APA. Essentially sexuality is considered hardwired by the medical community.

VanZant: She can answer any question however she wants. Just don't expect sympathy, and don't expect her to win if she does.

jp: It isn't discrimination. It is the fact that her answer was not politic.

Schaney: Note, before you speak, that your beloved bible also endorses slavery and stoning, among other cruel and vicious things. This isn't 'discrimination' either. It is making a very valid point. If there was a valid point in denying homosexuals certain civil rights, then by all means make it. Until then, I've yet to see any reason why we should deny so many people sucha basic freedom.

Missionary Kid: Homosexuality is no more a mental issue then heterosexuality. If being gay means you need meds or something is wrong with your brain then straight couples have exactly the same problems with them. How can you even compare ADD and homosexuality? That is like comparing heterosexuality and bi-polarity! Please, think, research, then post.

Kathy: Breach of contract is breach of contract. Throw her the hell out.

And even if she didn't just start spouting her beliefs, she wasn't at all diplomatic in her answer, which is what Miss America needs to be. Diplomatic. Not to mention that Prejean is the perfect example of someone who know nothing about which she speaks. When she appeared in an unauthorized interview (breaching her contract yet again) she proved it by not being able to answer any of the questions about gay marriage because she knew nothing about it, and was even forced to steal Palin's famous "Oh, I'll get back to you".

And yeah, I am sure you've had some gay discriminate. But when was the last time a teenager was killed for being straight? Try a resounding 'never'. You have minor difficulties with bigots- homosexuals face a nation full of them. So you have a right to your beliefs. You can believe that it isn't right. You can believe her answer was fine. Hell, you can believe anything you want. But just because you believe it, and just because you think you are right, but does not make it a politically viable option to take away the rights of more then 10% of the population, and your belief in it is not a reason to make it a law. And so you are being very intolerant. Good luck to you, and I hope one day that you become truly tolerant. But even if you do not change, don't expect America to stay as bigoted as you are.

First off, if you don't want an honest answer DO NOT ASK!!! They asked her the question..she gave her honest opinion! Whether you like it or not! The question was asked to her! I totally agree with her! Read the BIBLE...oh sorry, forgot! Most people nowdays seem to forget the basis of our country!!!You know , GOD created man..then he created woman so the man would not be alone! I dont know.. but i never read MAN & MAN or WOMAN & WOMAN. We are all uniquely built..like a puzzle, two holes can't fit together,and to sticks can't fit together...so, if u are trying the puzzle of life..and it doesn't fit...back up and look at all your pieces!!! So far as the pics are concerned.. I dont know much about those.. but cast the 1st stone if you have never done any wrong, At some point in all our lives we all have made mistakes...and we have lived with them..with hopes of overcoming and bettering ourselves( if not, you dont really care about yourself!) With that being said..maybe all of you should have been so critical of our new president as you are who will be crowned!

The bible is not the basis of this country. It never was, and it never will be. This country was based on the freedoms that a group of opressed people hoped to have for themselves, and for future generations, should their revolution be successful. If you need more proof then the fact that most of the founding fathers weren't even Christian, then I suggest you look at the Treaty of Tripoli in which it is plainly stated that America is not in any way based on Christian principles.

And yeah, we do all make mistakes. Normally, we own up to our mistakes, and we accept the consequences. She violated her contract several times. That kind of behavior has reprecussions, and there are consequences. Namley, losing her title.

You all seem to forget it's not up to you. It's up to Trump. It's his rules. He decides what is acceptable. He's decided.

You voted yes but I think you meant no...reread the question! Be careful voting in tricky elections, remember 2000!

Schaney: God made man in his image. We're gay 'cause that's how we're made. We can't help that any more than you can help being straight.

Irate missionary kid: Go to hell. Saying that a gay has mental health issues because of his sexuality is the same as a guy who likes shoes saying a guy who likes sandals has mental health issues. We're the same as any straight person, we just like a different gender.

To all others, good on you for tolerating gays. And facts are facts: If Prejean violated contract, she can be fired at the discretion of her employer. If he's really firing her because of her statement however, he's a sick human being. Although I may not agree with Prejean, she said what she believes and I have the utmost respect for her because she said that. I also think she is a beautiful woman who has as much of a chance of winning Ms. USA as all the other 50 women; after all, it is a beauty pageant, not a beliefs pageant. More than that however, she told the truth, and truth is the most beautiful thing in this world as far as I'm concerned.

I have to agree with you totally! These photos would not have come out if it weren't for Miss CA answering truthfully. I think the only one who should have to answer for themselves is Perez Hilton.

If the actual topic is the pictures...then I would say look back at her contract and make a decision based on that. But it seems that the issue is still her response to the question asked by Perez Hilton. He asked what "HER VIEWS" were. "How does SHE feel about the subject"...he did not ask her "How does AMERICA feel about this subject" or "How does CALIFORNIA feel" or even me, for that matter! He asked FOR HER OWN OPINION!!! And she gave HER OWN OPINION!!! And I think everyone is punishing her for that. We are ALL entitled to our OPINION!!! That's what's great about America!! Mr. Hilton can express his views and I believe that Ms. Prejean also has a right to express what she believes. ESPECIALLY WHEN SPECIFICALLY ASKED!!!! You don't want the answer...don't ask the question!!!!

Sorry, I have no respect for hateful bigots. So I don't give her credit for "telling the truth" when her belief is that one kind of person is inherintly better than the other. I don't give Hitler credit for being "true to his beliefs" in Aryan suppremacy either.

As far as the question goes, I agree. It shouldn't have been asked. No matter what her answer was, it would have been controversial. I doubt any of the other contestants got a question harder than, "How do you think we should achieve world peace?"

She is not a bigot , because she answered the question asked " what was her opinion"

not yours. If she had answered it differently, this would not even be happening. She is not the bigot or hypocrite. I applaud her for standing up for what she believes.

I agree with you. the question should not have been asked, but since it was , she should not be criticized for her answer just because it's not what some believe.

Nude photos of beauty pageant winners always surface. These may have come out a little earlier because of the controversy over her statements. At any rate there is no defense of her lying in order to be allowed to compete in the pageant.

She got caught. She will get tossed.

Defend her bigotry if you must...blaming the discovery of her deceipt on any of the multitude of people she offended is irresponsible and immoral even if it does make you feel better.

msmerymac:

Sorry, I have no respect for narrow minded people that can not respect the rights of others.

You use the word "bigot", maybe a little time looking up the meaning might give you a little more insight to yourself.

Her views are not considered radical or fanatical, except to you and your kind.

And yeah, I feel better to hear views that coincide with mine, just as it probably offended you to hear it.

harborside appraisal:

You know a lot about bigotry, right? Hitlers views were not considered radical or fanatical at the time except to people like msmerymac. Slavery was not considered radical or fanatical at the time except for people like msmerymac.

Bigotry is bigotry even when it is religious bigotry. Even when practiced by the "good" people.

You know a lot less about "the kind" of people who disagree with you than you think.

The pageant will take her crown away. The contract was violated.

I hope she has lots of cash in her bank account, cause people who start early with all of that plastic surgery have to keep the surgery going or stuff starts hitting the ground fast!

Of course she should lose her crown. This has nothing to do with how she answered the question posed to her. People are simply using this to push their beliefs. She signed a contract and she broke that contract. In addition to that she lied to the officials regarding the number of photos taken. What else might she be untruthful about. Not a great representative in my opinion.

She told the truth...or what was for her, the truth. Good for her.

She didn't choose the question...but she had the option to answer it in a way that didn't create controversy. She had the option of responding without lying and without being offensive. It's possible. It was a beauty pagaent, not a presidential election. Her opinion wasn't the issue, her ability to answer a controversial question without being offensive was the test she was given. She showed that when put on the spot, she was incapable of thinking of all the people she represented, and was only able to express her own personal (and offensive to many) opinion. Fine. Test given...test failed...move on.

When you open your mouth on national TV with a controversial opinion, even if you believe it's the truth, there might be people who disagree, and who take exception and who might want to express THEIR opinion as well. Why are you assuming that because she believed what she said she should get a "pass" on any consequences? No one is saying that we should all be respectful of poor little Perez's opinions although I'm sure he believes they are the truth and he has the courage to express them, knowing they are going to be unpopular with many. It's open season on him. Yet he did exactly the same thing she did, express a controversial opinion in a way that was divisive and discriminatory. Only his opinion shouldn't concern us much since he wasn't being considered as a representative for the whole country.

What makes this significant, is not her opinion. It's that she has chosen to abandon her duties as Miss California in favor of being the poster child for anti-equal rights. If that's what she wants to do...fine...more power to her. But she should resign the title rather than cheat the people of the state by taking pay for a job she has no intention of doing.

If she had photos that violated the contract she signed (at the time she signed it) then she was cheating the state when she signed the contract. She lied to the pagaent when she signed and she lied afterwards when she said there was only one. If she came out in support of gay marriage, would that make her photo's more shocking? Her cheating more of an issue? Would you be able to recognize lying and cheating for what it is? Or does she get a pass on her blatantly dishonest and disreputable behavior simply because she's a "good christian"?

If you lie about your past to get hired for a new job and then refuse to show up for work, don't answer the phone when your employer calls and instead, take your money and your position and use it for your own personal ego-building campaign, do you think that would be dishonest? The only reason she hasn't been fired already is because so many people would MISTAKENLY think it's because of her opinion. Lying, cheating and simply refusing to do her job of being a role model and spokesperson for the state is more than enough reason to kick her fanny to the curb. She does not deserve to represent hard working honest people who actually have to DO the jobs they get paid for.

Nice to know if I ever decide to lie and cheat and steal from my boss, I just have to go on national TV and express some religious bigotry to get a groundswell of mindless support.

Can't anti-equal rights people find a better spokesperson than her?

I don't agree that a lie is dignified by being called politically correct. At least if the person is straight forward you know where you stand and can stand back if you must.

When you compete for a PUBLIC title representing a state or nation, then you are supposed to represent them, not your own little self.

She picked the question out of a bowl, the question was "Do you think all other states should follow suit (Vermont legalizing gay marriage) and why or why not?"

Rather than attempt a reasoned response that took into account the fact that she was there as a REPRESENTATIVE OF HER STATE, she chose to express her very own little personal beliefs. Fine. She believes in discrimination and said so on national TV. Now a lot of other people who also believe in discrimination are willing to completely overlook the fact that she has lied and cheated to get her title (imagine how stupid the girls who actually played by the rules feel now!) and she won't do the job she isn't getting fired from.

I guess the anti-equality position is so shakey...so fragile...so desperate for whatever support it can get...that it wants her to represent them. Good luck with that.

Did you even see Vanessa Williams' photos? They weren't racy at all. They were pornography! There is a world of difference between these two sets of photos.
She may not speak for all Californians but she does speak for 52% of them. Get over yourselves and dump that dips..t Hilton.

is this english?

Since the Miss USA pagaent, she has refused to do her job. For THAT...she should lose her job.

No one cares about her opinions or Perez Hilton's opinions.

obviously, a LOT of people care. You might not, but it appears many do.

I'm not sure what town you live in where on the streets girls parade around topless, covering theirs upper-assetts with their stragically placed limbs while wearing Brazilian panties. As a bible thumper, would you have the same reaction - "Leave this girl alone and read the Bible"- if this was your daughter? If so, perhaps you need to take a little of your own advise and read a little more of your beloved Bible.

Well, what town do you live in? You can walk down the street and see girls with low cut tops that they might as well be nude in and short shorts and super short skirts where you don't have to wonder what color panties they are wearing. Going topless, or at least going topless while covering up is almost anti climactic in this day and age. Give me the good old days when you were at least curious about what was under all those clothes instead of grossed out by sagging withered boobs and cottage cheese thighs in double knit.

Rich:

You must live in my town. The average age of a woman is sixty, and they all dress like they are 12.

Been grossed out to long.

What it comes down to is that the minority of gays a.ka. hetrophobes strive for through political correctness is to push thier immoral and abnormal lifestyle throughout America knowing that the liberal politicians and not THE PEOPLE will ratify gay marriage or is that MIRAGE. Anyway Miss California had the guts to say what the Majority of the Country thinks and should be able to say so.

So it takes "guts" to be in the majority? That's a funny definition of courage. Just as imposing your will on a disenfranchised minority is a funny definition of freedom. You people think your freedom is the freedom to put your foot on everybody else's neck.

nice post....right on target

Miss Prejean has every right to FREEDOM of SPEECH...or has the American Media forgotten about Constitutional Law that they themselves use as a weapon of business every day!?

Last I heard, she STILL hadn't stopped speaking. NOTHING can shut her up. Cry me a river. You mean I'm being denied my freedom of speech if I don't hold a beauty pageant title? Because I don't, and I say whatever I please anyway.

She does represent 52% of us. Last time I check that is a majority.

52% of Americans believe that people should be discriminated against based on their sexual orientation? Not likely.

If I can get 52% of my co-workers to agree that my contract bites, do I still have to honor it?

Hey, you voted "yes" but I think you mean no! Did you misread the question?

"Should we feel sorry for her because a gay judge asked a loaded question which probably cost her the national prize? Sure."

According to everyone associated with this pageant she would have lost anyway. If she was punished for her answer she would not have finished 2nd.

Blaming everything on the gays is no more acceptable than blaming everything on the (latest) immigrants or the Catholics or the Jews or any other group you aren't part of.

Well put and to the point. It cuts right to the heart of the controversy. not the statement (which to me was not offensive) about gay marriage but, the veracity of her statements prior to her signing a contract with the pageant.

well put and says what is the truth. it is about her truthfulness about things in her life that would be violations of the contract she signed voluntarily

Well Said. Thank you.

Good post! I only differ on one part. I think she did give the easy answer.

I echo the sentiments you expressed in your last paragraph to Paris. We are observing that when the same political system homosexuals use to further their interests is being used against them, they can't stand it. They react with extreme emotion and ...well hate. It is a poorer reflection on the homosexuals and their organizations than it is on anybody else.

I echo the sentiments you expressed in your last paragraph to Paris. We are observing that when the same political system homosexuals use to further their interests is being used against them, they can't stand it. They react with extreme emotion and ...well hate. It is a poorer reflection on the homosexuals and their organizations than it is on anybody else.

Good post, the only error is Paris Hilton vs Perez Hilton (not his real name, he's actually hispanic). While the two share the description "Talentless" They're two different people. Paris Hilton is an Heiress to the Hilton fortune that thinks herself to be an actress and has had more strange penis than all the Miss USA contestants combined. Whereas Perez Hilton is a talentless little troll that also has probably had more strange penis than all Miss USA contestants combined and who more than likely fellated Trump to get the gig as a pagent judge.

You've obviously noticed our public schools have really gone downhill. Maybe 10 percent of these emails have proper spelling. What's wrong with people? Aren't they embarrassed? Don't they have spellcheck? Anyway, that was only one word misspelled in that missive. There were many other errors.