Miss California May Be Stripped Of Her Crown

[mactastic]

I'd put this in the other thread, but it got closed down after a spate of puppies and kittens...

Carrie Prejean may soon no longer be able to claim (http://www.kansascity.com/932/story/1183089.html)that she is not Miss America because of anti-Christian persecution. If this goes forward, she'll have to admit that she's not Miss American because she lied on her application form, and because she's been unable to abide by the terms of her agreement with pageant officials:
A second topless photo of Miss California Carrie Prejean has been released by TheDirty.com, days after Prejean promised the state pageant that there was only one such photo in existence.

The news that more racy photos might exist of their beauty queen had stunned California's state pageant officials.
Prejean has been the center of controversy ever since expressing her anti-gay marriage sentiments at the Miss USA pageant last month.

And, in a this-just-keeps-getting-weirder twist, TMZ reported on Thursday that Prejean's own father might be gay, according to allegations that surfaced during her parents' divorce in 1988. Read the story here.

Prejean told pageant officials that only one provocative photo existed - the one first posted at TheDirty.com earlier this week. But the second photo, similiar to the first, was posted Thursday.

TMZ reported that Prejean sent an e-mail to Keith Lewis, co-director for the Miss California USA pageant, saying, "This was when I was 17 years old. I was a minor. It was when I was first getting into the modeling world, being naive, and young. I shouldnt (sic) have taken the photo of me in my underwear. There are no other photos of me. This was the only one I took."
But on Wednesday, pageant officials learned that at least three other racy pics exist.

"I'm absolutely stunned. This completely changes things for us," Lewis said in a statement to "Access Hollywood."
"Yesterday, we thought she had explained things accurately. We need to revisit this issue with her."

Prejean signed a contract stating she has never been photographed nude or partially nude and the Miss California USA Organization told "Access" they will meet with runner-up Miss Malibu Tami Farrell in the next few days, suggesting she may soon be taking over the title of Miss California from Prejean.

Farrell told Billy Bush of "Access Hollywood" that she was ready to assume the tiara if need be.
Thankfully, the transition of power looks like it will go smoothly...

[kavika411]

Assuming it is true, such poetic justice.

[yg17]

I guess the crown won't be the first thing she's ever been stripped of.

[leekohler]

Oh! But she was attcked because of her wholesome morals! Oh wait... :rolleyes:

[obeygiant]

cue striptease music.


This story is kind of amusing on the surface. Its actually a little disturbing however. All she did was answer a question about same sex marriage according to the way she believed. Now there a second wave of attacks on her and controversy surrounding her. I disagree with Leek that she wanted this kind of attention. I doubt if the advocates for same-sex marriage, me included, want to be perceived as instigators of vicious attacks because someone doesn't follow a particular belief system.

Edit: In regards to the "racy" pictures and disqualification according to the rules of the pageant. I'd have to see the images to judge whether they are illicit or artfully done to see if she should be dq'd. :)


because of anti-Christian persecution.

Nice spin. This could easily be framed as prop 8 backlash and she's a scapegoat.

[leekohler]

cue striptease music.


This story is kind of amusing on the surface. Its actually a little disturbing however. All she did was answer a question about same sex marriage according to the way she believed. Now there a second wave of attacks on her and controversy surrounding her. I disagree with Leek that she wanted this kind of attention. I doubt if the advocates for same-sex marriage, me included, want to be perceived as instigators of vicious attacks because someone doesn't follow a particular belief system.

I'm sorry but, if she lied on her contract and loses her crown, how is that an attack? And trust me, she's loving every minute of it.

[Tilpots]

She asked for the attention and she got it. At least she's got a future with 'ol Hugh Hefner.;) I hope nobody's believing she's a victim here, because now she's got a name and a platform. Even Miss SC from a while back turned her bumbling "map" answer into a well paying modeling career. Prejean's set for the near future. No doubt she'll monetize her fifteen minutes of fame...

[freeny]

Here is one....
It is technically topless and against the rules.

[sn00pie]

It's quite sad how far this has been stretched. She stated her opinion, and people should respect her for it.

[leekohler]

It's quite sad how far this has been stretched. She stated her opinion, and people should respect her for it.

This has nothing to do with her opinion. This has to do with her lying on her contract. Or is your opinion that lying on a contract is just fine?

[jarjarblinks]

Here is one....
It is technically topless and against the rules.

That may be artistic in some quarters, but the pinkies really just blow it.

[GGGUUUYYY]

Maybe she didn't think that was topless, she isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

[mactastic]

cue striptease music.


This story is kind of amusing on the surface. Its actually a little disturbing however. All she did was answer a question about same sex marriage according to the way she believed. Now there a second wave of attacks on her and controversy surrounding her. I disagree with Leek that she wanted this kind of attention. I doubt if the advocates for same-sex marriage, me included, want to be perceived as instigators of vicious attacks because someone doesn't follow a particular belief system.
If only conservatives had gotten this upset about underhanded attacks on someone for their views who happened to be a CIA operative instead of a beauty pageant contestant...

Edit: In regards to the "racy" pictures and disqualification according to the rules of the pageant. I'd have to see the images to judge whether they are illicit or artfully done to see if she should be dq'd. :)
I won't post them here, but you can google her name if you actually want to see them. [EDIT: I guess this is unnecessary now that someone has posted one of the photos]

The pageant form specifically asks about morality, and as an example asks if the contestant has ever posed nude or semi-nude. Prejean apparently lied in her response to that question. Pageant regulations also state that you cannot engage in public appearances without the permission of the pageant officials. Apparently, Prejean has been doing a bit of public appearing without informing anyone. Thus, she violated the rules of the contest.

Now, personally, I think it's silly to disqualify these people from a contest where they strut around in a skimpy bikini because they previously used their hands as a bikini top and showed some side-boob, but if she couldn't play by the rules, she shouldn't have been on that stage to begin with.

Nice spin. This could easily be framed as prop 8 backlash and she's a scapegoat.
That's been her claim to fame this whole time. It'll be interesting to see if these "family values" groups continue to use a known liar as a spokesperson...

[freeny]

There are apparently others that are more revealing. This one was released as a teaser...

[leekohler]

That's been her claim to fame this whole time. It'll be interesting to see if these "family values" groups continue to use a known liar as a spokesperson...

And I thought lying was against the Ten Commandments. I guess it's OK as long as you're keepin' them homos in their place.

[skunk]

This whole hoohah is utterly ridiculous.

[obeygiant]

"This was when I was 17 years old. I was a minor. It was when I was first getting into the modeling world, being naive, and young. I shouldnt (sic) have taken the photo of me in my underwear. There are no other photos of me. This was the only one I took."

She made a mistake by saying "this is the only one I took," if thats what she really said. Everyone know that a shoot like that you don't spend all the time in makeup and hair and "wardrobe" to take a single shot. Many shots are taken and few are released. Someone is obviously is profiting from this, other than Prejean, to release the out takes of the booby shoot.

[yg17]

Why the hell is she taking topless photos at 17 anyways? Isn't that illegal?

[Tilpots]

"This was when I was 17 years old. I was a minor. It was when I was first getting into the modeling world, being naive, and young. I shouldnt (sic) have taken the photo of me in my underwear. There are no other photos of me. This was the only one I took."

She made a mistake by saying "this is the only one I took," if thats what she really said. Everyone know that a shoot like that you don't spend all the time in makeup and hair and "wardrobe" to take a single shot. Many shots are taken and few are released. Someone is obviously is profiting from this, other than Prejean, to release the out takes of the booby shoot.

Was watching "Extra" the other day when this story broke, and they believe the photos (yes, multiple photos) were taken well after she was 17. They offered some proof, but I can't seem to find it now. Will post a link if I find it.

[mactastic]

Why the hell is she taking topless photos at 17 anyways? Isn't that illegal?
"Wow, you're hot. You know, you could totally be a model"

"Really? You think so?"

"Oh for sure. You know, I have a cousin who works for a modeling agency. Why don't you come back to my place and we'll take a few pictures so I can show him how beautiful you are?"

"Well, ok. But nothing dirty"

"Of course not. Totally legit, very artistic pictures. This could be your big break..."

"Alright... let's do it."

...

"Now, to be really artistic, you're going to have to take your top off and pose for me in your panties. And sign this form saying you're 18... Ok, here we go!"

[leekohler]

"Wow, you're hot. You know, you could totally be a model"

"Really? You think so?"

"Oh for sure. You know, I have a cousin who works for a modeling agency. Why don't you come back to my place and we'll take a few pictures so I can show him how beautiful you are?"

"Well, ok. But nothing dirty"

"Of course not. Totally legit, very artistic pictures. This could be your big break..."

"Alright... let's do it."

...

"Now, to be really artistic, you're going to have to take your top off and pose for me in your panties. And sign this form saying you're 18... Ok, here we go!"

Happened to Traci Lords. And she was younger and did much more than Miss California. But if I had to choose to be one of them, I'd choose Traci Lords. She turned out to be much cooler.

[freeny]

"Wow, you're hot. You know, you could totally be a model"

"Really? You think so?"

"Oh for sure. You know, I have a cousin who works for a modeling agency. Why don't you come back to my place and we'll take a few pictures so I can show him how beautiful you are?"

"Well, ok. But nothing dirty"

"Of course not. Totally legit, very artistic pictures. This could be your big break..."

"Alright... let's do it."

...

"Now, to be really artistic, you're going to have to take your top off and pose for me in your panties. And sign this form saying you're 18... Ok, here we go!"
Its like you were right there in my dorm room all those years :eek:

[Counterfit]

At least she's got a future with 'ol Hugh Hefner.;)
Not unless she gets implants and dyes her hair platinum blonde. That seems to be his type...
Now, personally, I think it's silly to disqualify these people from a contest where they strut around in a skimpy bikini because they previously used their hands as a bikini top and showed some side-boob,

"How about this side-boob? Does that turn you on? Well it shouldn't, because it's my side-boob."
:D

[Tilpots]

Not unless she gets implants and dyes her hair platinum blonde. That seems to be his type...


They're already fake! The Miss California pageant officials payed for 'em!!! (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30495983/)

[mcnicks]

This whole hoohah is utterly ridiculous.

Technically, we haven't seen her hoohah yet.

[beatzfreak]

Happened to Traci Lords. And she was younger and did much more than Miss California. But if I had to choose to be one of them, I'd choose Traci Lords. She turned out to be much cooler.

I love Traci Lords. We djed together when she had her short music career in the 90's. Really nice person and humble too.

As far as Miss California, forget about her view on same-sex marriage (although she sounded like a ditz trying to explain it); she voided her contract by lying. If she loses her crown, she'll be free to do whatever she wants. Vanessa Williams has done pretty well. I do think it's a bit hypocritical for her to be the spokesperson for the National Organization for Marriage, but that's never stood in the way of conservative organizations.

What bothers me is she blames others for her mistakes. It's nobodies fault but her own that she posed for those pictures and then lied about it, and continues to lie about it. Such a nice Christian girl. :rolleyes:

Donald Trump is loving this. He's probably already conjuring up a controversy for next year.

[leekohler]

I love Traci Lords. We djed together when she had her short music career in the 90's. Really nice person and humble too.



The porn queens from that time have so many interesting stories to tell. While I haven't met Traci, (yet, I want to) I have met Seka a few times and had some cool conversations with her. Super nice lady- very intelligent and great to talk to.

[mactastic]

"How about this side-boob? Does that turn you on? Well it shouldn't, because it's my side-boob."
:D
What is this, the Peter Griffin Side Boob Hour? :p

[beatzfreak]

The porn queens from that time have so many interesting stories to tell. While I haven't met Traci, (yet, I want to) I have met Seka a few times and had some cool conversations with her. Super nice lady- very intelligent and great to talk to.

That's cool you got to meet Seka, she's legendary, and a real natural beauty. You don't find that much anymore. Everyone is so fake these days. They all look the same, cookie-cutter.

[leekohler]

That's cool you got to meet Seka, she's legendary, and a real natural beauty. You don't find that much anymore. Everyone is so fake these days. They all look the same, cookie-cutter.

Yeah- there was an art gallery here that would have parties where they had all sorts of porn vendors come and sell their stuff. I don't think I have to tell you how fun those parties were. All sorts of people in the industry would show up. I can't remember who else, this was in the late 90's, but Seka was the coolest. She showed up to all of those parties.

[yg17]

What is this, the Peter Griffin Side Boob Hour? :p

Yes, just don't tell those fellas at the freakin' FCC :p

[Sun Baked]

Well at least she won't be a current Miss California when she poses for Playboy. ;)

[mactastic]

Well at least she won't be a current Miss California when she poses for Playboy. ;)
Indeed, nothing screams "wholesome Christian family values" like spreading your legs for the camera...

Of course, nothing screams "money in the bank" like spreading your legs for the camera either.

I guess we'll get to see what kind of values Miss Prejean has once this gets settled.

[yg17]

Of course, nothing screams "money in the bank" like spreading your legs for the camera either.

If I spread my legs for the camera, I'd go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Maybe I just need to find the right camera :D

[leekohler]

If I spread my legs for the camera, I'd go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Maybe I just need to find the right camera :D

No- just the right audience. ;)

[mactastic]

If I spread my legs for the camera, I'd go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Maybe I just need to find the right camera :D
Oh I dunno... Lee might be willing to stuff a fiver down your jockeys. ;)

[leekohler]

Oh I dunno... Lee might be willing to stuff a fiver down your jockeys. ;)

Sure- why not? ;)

[obeygiant]

If I spread my legs for the camera, I'd go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Maybe I just need to find the right camera :D

Actually if the camera wasn't there it would just be prostitution. The camera makes it "art".

[leekohler]

Actually if the camera wasn't there it would just be prostitution. The camera makes it "art".

And don't we all just love that? ;)

[Sun Baked]

Actually if the camera wasn't there it would just be prostitution. The camera makes it "art".

Even if there is a camera, and you are artistic enough to paint it up to look like a clown, if you do it in some public spaces it is usually some form of lewd conduct ... and within 1000 ft or a school it gets even worse for you.

The camera can just be there to provide evidence at your sentencing.

http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2622

[mactastic]

And don't we all just love that? ;)
That's just the stupidest part of our anti-prostitution laws -- that you can get paid to have sex with someone on film, and it's legal; but if there's no camera it's illegal.

It just makes no sense.

[leekohler]

That's just the stupidest part of our anti-prostitution laws -- that you can get paid to have sex with someone on film, and it's legal; but if there's no camera it's illegal.

It just makes no sense.

I don't disagree, of course. But you already knew that. ;)

[yg17]

Actually if the camera wasn't there it would just be prostitution. The camera makes it "art".

Well, if you're just spreading your legs, then it's not prostitution. Unless you're paying yourself to have sex with yourself :D

[FreeState]

Why the hell is she taking topless photos at 17 anyways? Isn't that illegal?

There is a lot of speculation that she stated she was 17 in the photo - as a lie - to stop people from posting the remaining photo's due to child pornography laws.

[obeygiant]

Well, if you're just spreading your legs, then it's not prostitution. Unless you're paying yourself to have sex with yourself :D

might be a good way to make money.

[yg17]

might be a good way to make money.


No, it's not, because if it was, I would be rich by now. Maybe I'm not charging myself enough, I should increase my prices...you know, tough economic times and all that :D

[iJohnHenry]

If I spread my legs for the camera, I'd go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Maybe I just need to find the right camera :D

No- just the right audience. ;)

No, just the correct distance. :p

Tootsie - (1982)

[Dorothy Michaels' screen test]
Rita: I'd like to make her look a little more attractive, how far can you pull back?
Cameraman: How do you feel about Cleveland?
Rita: Knock it off.

[sn00pie]

Why the hell is she taking topless photos at 17 anyways? Isn't that illegal?
Miley Cyrus did it and I don't think she even turned 15 yet :p

This has nothing to do with her opinion. This has to do with her lying on her contract. Or is your opinion that lying on a contract is just fine?
Hehe I need to sleep more...I got this thread confused with the one about the pageant contestant who spoke about her views regarding same-sex marriage.

[stevento]

How many times in the past has this happened? A miss usa contestant accused of posing nude/topless and in jeopardy of losing the "crown"?

[szark]

Why the hell is she taking topless photos at 17 anyways? Isn't that illegal?

I believe it would be legal if the pictures are not of a sexual nature, and she obtained her parent's permission. I doubt the latter happened.

Miley Cyrus did it and I don't think she even turned 15 yet :p

I think she was 16 when the photo was taken, and certainly wasn't showing any "side boob". A couple of other instances I can recall: Jessica Biel posed for a magazine fully topless at 17, and Thora Birch appeared fully topless in the movie "American Beauty" at 17.

[erickkoch]

The current Miss Rhode Island 2009, Alysha Castonguay, has just had topless photos of her posted on TMZ.com.

According to the article the pageant was aware of them beforehand so it was not an issue. If you look at them they are much more revealing than those of Miss California. They were published for MAXIM magazine.

It seems to me then that the only issue is she had a revealing photo taken of her that she didn't disclose, but if she had disclosed it there would have been no problem.

I think this is all BS. The pageant is going to paint itself into a corner with this one. These beauty queens are young models, there's always going to be something out there. If they remove Miss CA they will have to remove every model that comes after her in which a picture is leaked by an old boyfriend or something taken at a party they forgot about years ago, otherwise they will be accused of a double standard. This seems to me an example of a political hit job.

I also think these pageants are an anachronism and should be done away with. Their time is past.

BTW, Olivia Hussey did a topless scene in "Romeo and Juliet." She was 15 at the time and was unable to attend the premier because she was underage since the movie contained nudity (her own breasts!).

[mactastic]

I believe it would be legal if the pictures are not of a sexual nature, and she obtained her parent's permission. I doubt the latter happened.



I think she was 16 when the photo was taken, and certainly wasn't showing any "side boob". A couple of other instances I can recall: Jessica Biel posed for a magazine fully topless at 17, and Thora Birch appeared fully topless in the movie "American Beauty" at 17.
Wow... you certainly are up on your underage nudity! :p

[MacNut]

I do find it amusing that she talks about gay people getting married not to be natural yet she gets fake boobs. Did they force those on her.:p

[szark]

BTW, Olivia Hussey did a topless scene in "Romeo and Juliet." She was 15 at the time and was unable to attend the premier because she was underage since the movie contained nudity (her own breasts!).

Forgot about that one! I remember watching that in high school. I was surprised because our teacher didn't fast forward through the nude scene. (It was a Catholic school.)

Wow... you certainly are up on your underage nudity! :p

:eek: :p It just amuses me that the media always makes such a big deal out of this sort of thing whenever it happens, so I tend to remember the stories.

[obeygiant]

Trump is going to have a press conference tomorrow on whether Prejean is out or not.

[Tilpots]

Trump is going to have a press conference tomorrow on whether Prejean is out or not.

Any bets on how many times he mentions "The Apprentice?" I say at least twice.

[obeygiant]

Any bets on how many times he mentions "The Apprentice?" I say at least twice.

Or rather any bets on if the girl is out. I say he lets her stay. A couple years ago that other contestant had some kind of coke problem and she got to stay.

[NT1440]

While i still think shes a bigotted bitch, i find it sad that the media can run with a story and get it so big that this kind of thing happens. OMG she was a model!?!? big deal.

I also cannot beleive that cheerleader coach got fired because she had done playboy years ago, complete BS.

I'm getting really tired with this countries extreme problem with sexuality.

[Tilpots]

Or rather any bets on if the girl is out. I say he lets her stay. A couple years ago that other contestant had some kind of coke problem and she got to stay.

I agree, I think he'll let her stay even though she's skipping events and breaking other rules as well (http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/05/11/ent.miss.california.usa/index.html).

California pageant officials first soured to Prejean when she decided to support an ad campaign by the National Organization for Marriage several days before the photos emerged, he said.

She also violated her duties by recording a phone message being used by the group to solicit donations for its campaign against same-sex marriage, Lewis said.

<snip>

But, he added, state officials have not been able to reach Prejean, and she has missed scheduled appearances.

Trump has a vested monetary interest in her being associated with him and he never misses an opportunity to make a buck.

[obeygiant]

While i still think shes a bigotted bitch

I prefer ignorant super-hottie, thank you.

[NT1440]

I prefer ignorant super-hottie, thank you.

Haha, you say tomato, i say bigoted fool :p

[solvs]

I know way more than I should about this story, but there's no way these were taken when she was 17 because she already has the implants in them. Another lie in a long line. This is the problem in case anyone is still wondering. Not that she took the pictures, but she lied about them, then lied again about her age in them, then lied again (saying there was only one). Add this to getting the breast implants, she just doesn't seem as moral as she pretended to be. When you go spouting the things she did, and give the reasons she did, it's no wonder people want to point out her hypocrisy. If people would just stay out of gays lives and let them do as they wish (2 consenting adults, not everyone believes the way you do, seriously who cares), and wouldn't hide behind a religion they aren't even following, this wouldn't even be an issue.

But she had to make it all about "morality", and keep going with it, and now she gets to see what the media does when people they want us to care about get knocked off their lying, hypocritical, high horses.

[The Californian]

This morning Donald Trump announced that the Ms. USA / Ms. Universe program doesn't believe Ms. California, Carrie Prejean did anything wrong and she was actually commended for giving an honest answer where a popular answer would have been easier. What do you guys think?

I believe that we should always be standing up for people freedom of speech, because even if what someone believes is very different from what we believe I think that it is a beautiful thing that we live in a country where we are all about to express ourselves freely without being condemned for our beliefs. While I am a straight, Christian man, I have many gay friends and learn things from that that I could never learn from my straight friends ... I think it's an incredible feeling to be able to share honest, open communication with others ... but, that is just my opinion.

What do the rest of you think?

[Tilpots]

So, she's keeping the crown. The Donald said, "We're in the 21st Century."

Anybody actually see the press conference to see how many times he mentioned The Apprentice?

[yg17]

This morning Donald Trump announced that the Ms. USA / Ms. Universe program doesn't believe Ms. California, Carrie Prejean did anything wrong and she was actually commended for giving an honest answer where a popular answer would have been easier. What do you guys think?

I believe that we should always be standing up for people freedom of speech, because even if what someone believes is very different from what we believe I think that it is a beautiful thing that we live in a country where we are all about to express ourselves freely without being condemned for our beliefs. While I am a straight, Christian man, I have many gay friends and learn things from that that I could never learn from my straight friends ... I think it's an incredible feeling to be able to share honest, open communication with others ... but, that is just my opinion.

What do the rest of you think?

She has freedom of speech and has every right to say what she said. I still think she's a bigot.

[Gelfin]

She has freedom of speech and has every right to say what she said. I still think she's a bigot.

This is not a freedom of speech issue. The First Amendment is a prohibition on government interference, not a way for citizens to insulate themselves against criticism and social consequences from their neighbors. Criticizing Prejean's bigotry does not violate her speech rights. Neither would private sanctions, such as removing her title, have been.

Likewise Perez Hilton had "freedom of speech" in exactly the same sense when he criticized Prejean's opinion and called her a bitch. It won't be a violation of those rights when he is excluded from judging any future pageants as a consequence.

I could have given told you my response to Trump's decision before he made it: It is Mr. Trump's pageant and he may decide entirely as he pleases.

If you don't like his decision, don't let notions of "free speech" guilt trip you into continuing to support his human livestock show. You have no such obligation. It is a perverse notion of "freedom of speech" indeed that would prevent you from having a principled reaction to something someone else says.

[leekohler]

This morning Donald Trump announced that the Ms. USA / Ms. Universe program doesn't believe Ms. California, Carrie Prejean did anything wrong and she was actually commended for giving an honest answer where a popular answer would have been easier. What do you guys think?

I believe that we should always be standing up for people freedom of speech, because even if what someone believes is very different from what we believe I think that it is a beautiful thing that we live in a country where we are all about to express ourselves freely without being condemned for our beliefs. While I am a straight, Christian man, I have many gay friends and learn things from that that I could never learn from my straight friends ... I think it's an incredible feeling to be able to share honest, open communication with others ... but, that is just my opinion.

What do the rest of you think?

What does that have to do with her lying on her application? I thought that's what this thread was about.

[mactastic]

What does that have to do with her lying on her application? I thought that's what this thread was about.
Indeed, after watching the news conference, I'm left wondering why the pageant actually has any rules to begin with if you're simply not going to enforce them on the beautiful people?

In any case, it's Trump's pageant to do with as he pleases. If he wants to excuse contract violations because she's hot (which is essentially what his statement this morning boiled down to), more power to him.

[fivepoint]

I think its hilarious that you guys are all up in a fit when she essentially has the exact same view on gay marriage as Barack Obama. :rolleyes:

[leekohler]

I think its hilarious that you guys are all up in a fit when she essentially has the exact same view on gay marriage as Barack Obama. :rolleyes:

This thread isn't about gay marriage. It's about the fact that she lied on her application. Apparently, that's OK.

[fivepoint]

This thread isn't about gay marriage. It's about the fact that she lied on her application. Apparently, that's OK.

No, actually it's not. And you know it's not. If she hadn't OFFENDED you and the larger gay community in her statements we wouldn't be having this discussion.

She pissed you guys off and now its a witch hunt to find any sort of failing that you can. If she had answered the question 'correctly' in your eyes, won the competition, and the homophobes were bringing these issues up you would be flipping out and yelling at the 'bigots' who are running their own witch hunt.

Right?

What I find particularly entertaining is that she has virtually exactly the same position as BO, and NO ONE here wants to talk about THAT!!! :)

[KompleX]

she essentially has the exact same view on gay marriage as Barack Obama. :rolleyes:
obama does not support a constitutional ban on gay marriage, while miss california made it clear that she does when she appeared in a commercial by an organization that is promoting just that.

[leekohler]

No, actually it's not. And you know it's not. If she hadn't OFFENDED you and the larger gay community in her statements we wouldn't be having this discussion.

She pissed you guys off and now its a witch hunt to find any sort of failing that you can. If she had answered the question 'correctly' in your eyes, won the competition, and the homophobes were bringing these issues up you would be flipping out and yelling at the 'bigots' who are running their own witch hunt.

Right?

What I find particularly entertaining is that she has virtually exactly the same position as BO, and NO ONE here wants to talk about THAT!!! :)

Oh please. There are consequences for freedom of speech. We're more than allowed to voice our opinions. If she can't stand the heat, she should get out of the kitchen. And BTW- we didn't lie on her application- she did. Deal with it.

obama does not support a constitutional ban on gay marriage, while miss california made it clear that she does when she appeared in a commercial by an organization that is promoting just that.

Thank you. At least he won't stand in our way.

[fivepoint]

obama does not support a constitutional ban on gay marriage, while miss california made it clear that she does when she appeared in a commercial by an organization that is promoting just that.

Right.... because the whole uproar started 3 weeks later when she appeared in a commercial. :rolleyes:

C'mon, give me a break!

[leekohler]

Right.... because the whole uproar started 3 weeks later when she appeared in a commercial. :rolleyes:

C'mon, give me a break!

Umm...you're reaching again and embarrassing yourself. People have a right to comment on things they disagree with.

[fivepoint]

Oh please. There are consequences for freedom of speech. We're more than allowed to voice our opinions. If she can't stand the heat, she should get out of the kitchen. And BTW- we didn't lie on her application- she did. Deal with it.

I'm glad you can admit that it's a witch hunt.

Now, back to my BO point... like I said... when the big issue went down, and when the entire gay community (and Perez Hilton) the next morning went nuts calling her a b*tch and such... she hadn't done anything beyond BO's own views. A tad hypocritical, don't you think?

So, two people with the exact same views... one gets verbally harassed, called a b*tch, bigot, and targeted by the entire gay movement... and the other is voted the president of the United States, called the 'savior' by some, and enjoys some of the highest approval ratings from ultra liberal voters from any president in recent history.

Anyway, just wanted to make that point. Enjoy the rest of your conversation!

[NT1440]

Now, back to my BO point... like I said... when the big issue went down, and when the entire gay community (and Perez Hilton) the next morning went nuts calling her a b*tch and such... she hadn't done anything beyond BO's own views. A tad hypocritical, don't you think?



What exactly is hypocritical there?:confused:

[davidwarren]

No, actually it's not. And you know it's not. If she hadn't OFFENDED you and the larger gay community in her statements we wouldn't be having this discussion.

She pissed you guys off and now its a witch hunt to find any sort of failing that you can. If she had answered the question 'correctly' in your eyes, won the competition, and the homophobes were bringing these issues up you would be flipping out and yelling at the 'bigots' who are running their own witch hunt.

Right?

What I find particularly entertaining is that she has virtually exactly the same position as BO, and NO ONE here wants to talk about THAT!!! :)
:eek:








+1. This is because she doesn't support gay marriage and it ticked off the MR gay armada. If it wasn't for her answer, no one would even care or know who she was.

[obeygiant]

obama does not support a constitutional ban on gay marriage, while miss california made it clear that she does when she appeared in a commercial by an organization that is promoting just that.

"Constitutional" is a big word and I never heard her say anything in regards to that. If you're trying to imply guilt by association, we've had that debate already*, and it doesn't jibe.

Obama is on record as saying "marriage is between a man and a woman" and voiced strong support for civil unions between same-sex couples "that provide legal rights to same-sex couples (so) that they can visit each other in the hospital if they get sick, (so) they can transfer property to each other. If they've got benefits, they can make sure those benefits apply to their partners." link (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/3375059/Barack-Obama-marriage-is-between-a-man-and-a-woman.html)

*See Obama/Ayers Connections.

[Iscariot]

Now, back to my BO point

I was not willing to condemn Miss California for her views, and I think this whole thing is the height of absurdity.

Having said that, there is an important distinction between the views of Miss California and the views of Barack Obama. Miss California has taken action in a decidedly un-secular way, both with her vote and with her participation in that commercial. To my knowledge, Barack Obama has not done so.

If he has, or if he does in the future, I would be much more willing to condemn him. He is in a position where he should know better and know the value of secular government.

[leekohler]

I'm glad you can admit that it's a witch hunt.

Now, back to my BO point... like I said... when the big issue went down, and when the entire gay community (and Perez Hilton) the next morning went nuts calling her a b*tch and such... she hadn't done anything beyond BO's own views. A tad hypocritical, don't you think?

So, two people with the exact same views... one gets verbally harassed, called a b*tch, bigot, and targeted by the entire gay movement... and the other is voted the president of the United States, called the 'savior' by some, and enjoys some of the highest approval ratings from ultra liberal voters from any president in recent history.

Anyway, just wanted to make that point. Enjoy the rest of your conversation!

She did go beyond it- she stated she thought no one in the country should have equal marriage rights, and now she's acting on it. Obama has said that while he believes marriage is between a man and a woman, he also would not ban gay marriage. Those are two different viewpoints. Sorry you don't like them.


+1. This is because she doesn't support gay marriage and it ticked off the MR gay armada. If it wasn't for her answer, no one would even care or know who she was.

The MR gay armada? Love it. I'll start using it from now on. You people really are afraid of us. How amusing. And you're right- anyone who doesn't support equal marriage rights does piss me off. If you were in my shoes, you'd be pissed too.

[yg17]

+1. This is because she doesn't support gay marriage and it ticked off the MR gay armada. If it wasn't for her answer, no one would even care or know who she was.

Yeah, nice try with that gay armada crap. Most of us at MR who support gay marriage are straight as an arrow, we just support equal rights for everyone. I'd have to check with Lee, but I don't think we're a part of their armada :rolleyes:

[skunk]

And BTW- we didn't lie on her application- she did.Surely this is not about her application form.

[Tilpots]

If she had answered the question 'correctly' in your eyes, won the competition, and the homophobes were bringing these issues up you would be flipping out and yelling at the 'bigots' who are running their own witch hunt.


Regardless of her answer, she still wouldn't have won. Miss NC beat her in every category.

Surely this is not about her application form.

An object in motion stays in motion...

[leekohler]

Surely this is not about her application form.

That was the original subject of the thread.

[skunk]

Maybe so, but it's not the driving force behind the moralistic attitude.

[leekohler]

Maybe so, but it's not the driving force behind the moralistic attitude.

I'm not going to deny that, and do not have a problem with it.

[mgguy]

What I find particularly entertaining is that she has virtually exactly the same position as BO, and NO ONE here wants to talk about THAT!!!

Actually, I pointed this out two or more times earlier in this thread. This refusal to hold BO to the same standards as others is nothing new here. It must be stressful to know that someone they support so strongly holds views that they hate and can't criticize him for with the same intensity that they can this woman.

[zap2]

Actually, I pointed this out two or more times earlier in this thread. This refusal to hold BO to the same standards as others is nothing new here. It must be stressful to know that someone they support so strongly holds views that they hate and can't criticize him for with the same intensity that they can this woman.

Yes, you've found the whole in the Liberals logic :rolleyes:


Or perhaps it comes down to

Miss CA is defined in a political sphere as this ONE issue. Obama has tons of different issues he is focusing on in the media, gay marriage isn't high up there(sadly, I wish the Federal government would define it)

Also she was in ads by the National Organization for Marriage, which was for Prop 8. Obama was not. Clearly they differ in some aspects here.

[yg17]

Actually, I pointed this out two or more times earlier in this thread. This refusal to hold BO to the same standards as others is nothing new here. It must be stressful to know that someone they support so strongly holds views that they hate and can't criticize him for with the same intensity that they can this woman.

This was already covered in this thread. Obama doesn't support a constitutional ban on it.

[hulugu]

...the MR gay armada....

This should be a t-shirt.

....
The MR gay armada? Love it. I'll start using it from now on...

;)

[leekohler]

This was already covered in this thread. Obama doesn't support a constitutional ban on it.

Exactly. What is so hard to figure out? How many times do we have to say it?

BTW- Saw the press conference last night. What a load of horse s*** that was. I couldn't believe her lame excuses for the nude photos, and her mother was horrible. I agree with Perez Hilton. Apparently, she can have an opinion, while he can't. And no, Hilton is not my favorite person either, but he's far from "evil" as Prejean's mom described him.

Like I said before- she's having a blast riding this all the way to the bank. Someday in the future, people like Prejean will be condemned in much the same way racists are. This whole affair has been disgusting. That people are on this forum defending her is even more disgusting.

[fivepoint]

Exactly. What is so hard to figure out? How many times do we have to say it?

Exactly. What is so hard to figure out? The uproar started immediately after her speech, not weeks later when she started appearing in ads (which doesn't even necessarily mean she even supports an amendment)! It is hypocritical because the witch hunt and uproar started immediately after she claimed to have the exact same views as BO.

You guys already admitted that it was a hypocritical witch hunt before and are now looking for 'outs'. Bottom line... she has an opinion that deeply bothers you (perhaps rightfully so), but instead of disagreeing with her on an intellectual level and discussing it, many in the gay community have made her out to be some sort of evil person and have personally attacked her without regard for much at all.

It's much easier to attack a person than it is to attack ideals/opinions. The low road was taken here... that much is obvious.

BTW, "All hail Obama!" :cool:

[themoonisdown09]

Boobs!

Who actually cares about the Miss America Pageants? Who actually remembers who won it the year before? People make such a big deal about something that doesn't matter.

[iJohnHenry]

This should be a t-shirt.;)

Avast, me hardies. :p

[leekohler]

Exactly. What is so hard to figure out? The uproar started immediately after her speech, not weeks later when she started appearing in ads (which doesn't even necessarily mean she even supports an amendment)! It is hypocritical because the witch hunt and uproar started immediately after she claimed to have the exact same views as BO.

You guys already admitted that it was a hypocritical witch hunt before and are now looking for 'outs'. Bottom line... she has an opinion that deeply bothers you (perhaps rightfully so), but instead of disagreeing with her on an intellectual level and discussing it, many in the gay community have made her out to be some sort of evil person and have personally attacked her without regard for much at all.

It's much easier to attack a person than it is to attack ideals/opinions. The low road was taken here... that much is obvious.

BTW, "All hail Obama!" :cool:

There's a HUGE difference between someone who advocates for rights being taken from a group country-wide (Yes, she said it in her speech too), and someone who say he doesn't believe in it, but won't work against it. If you can't understand that, then you've got serious reading comprehension problems.

And I certainly never admitted to any "hypoctical witch hunt". Get over yourself.

[mgguy]

Avast, me hardies. :p

Is there a subliminal message here?

There's a HUGE difference between someone who advocates for rights being taken from a group country-wide (Yes, she said it in her speech too), and someone who say he doesn't believe in it, but won't work against it. If you can't understand that, then you've got serious reading comprehension problems.

So you have no problem with BO saying marriage should only be between a man and a woman? What if the issue were about interracial marriage (assuming for the moment that this was still illegal) and Bush were still president, would you be as sanguine about Bush saying that marriage should only be allowed between people of the same race, but wouldn't try to stop any movement to have the law overturned? Isn't what a person believes, their moral compass if you will, important? If this is a core civil rights issue, aren't you concerned that BO is on the wrong side of it from your perspective? I just don't get why people are so outraged at what a beauty pageant contestant believes and expresses and yet don't seem to care that BO basically shares the same views (and may actually believe that a constitutional ban against gay marriage should be sought but doesn't day admit it because it would cost him dearly politically).

[leekohler]

Is there a subliminal message here?



So you have no problem with BO saying marriage should only be between a man and a woman? What if the issue were about interracial marriage (assuming for the moment that this was still illegal) and Bush were still president, would you be as sanguine about Bush saying that marriage should only be allowed between people of the same race, but wouldn't try to stop any movement to have the law overturned? Isn't what a person believes, their moral compass if you will, important? If this is a core civil rights issue, aren't you concerned that BO is on the wrong side of it from your perspective? I just don't get why people are so outraged at what a beauty pageant contestant believes and expresses and yet don't seem to care that BO basically shares the same views (and may actually believe that a constitutional ban against gay marriage should be sought but doesn't day admit it because it would cost him dearly politically).

Look- I've stated my opinion on this many times in this thread. Others have stated their reasoning as well. It's explained pretty thoroughly.

THIS IS THE LAST TIME I"LL SAY IT.

The fact is that Obama and Prejean do NOT hold the same view. People can say they don't believe in something without forcing that belief on others. That's Obama's stance. Prejean wants to force her views on others. She said it in her speech and now she's taking action on it. Obama has done no such thing, nor has he given me any reason to think he would. Quite the opposite.

[fivepoint]

Look- I've stated my opinion on this many times in this thread. Others have stated their reasoning as well. It's explained pretty thoroughly.

THIS IS THE LAST TIME I"LL SAY IT.

The fact is that Obama and Prejean do NOT hold the same view. People can say they don't believe in something without forcing that belief on others. That's Obama's stance. Prejean wants to force her views on others. She said it in her speech and now she's taking action on it. Obama has done no such thing, nor has he given me any reason to think he would. Quite the opposite.


You can't just make things up and call them the truth, Lee. Her speech is out there for everyone to read. Her position in the contest was exactly the same as BO. Obama is the Pres of the U.S. and said he does not support gay marriage. Prejean said th same.

"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, I think 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 out there, but that's how I was raised."

The difference in how the two are handled is vastly hypocritical. I think you'd have to have your head in the sand not to see the variability.

[mgguy]

Look- I've stated my opinion on this many times in this thread. Others have stated their reasoning as well. It's explained pretty thoroughly.

THIS IS THE LAST TIME I"LL SAY IT.

The fact is that Obama and Prejean do NOT hold the same view. People can say they don't believe in something without forcing that belief on others. That's Obama's stance. Prejean wants to force her views on others. She said it in her speech and now she's taking action on it. Obama has done no such thing, nor has he given me any reason to think he would. Quite the opposite.

OK. But in a way, BO has far more influence on citizens of this country than a beauty contestant. As president, he has said publicly that he believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. Do you not think that this gives comfort to those who believe the same way, and might make them feel more justified in trying to stop gay marriage than if he had not said that? The president has a "bully pulpit" to sway public opinion and move people. His stated opinion on this issue will only make those who share his point of view feel good inside that they agree with the "anointed one."

[yg17]

You can't just make things up and call them the truth, Lee. Her speech is out there for everyone to read. Her position in the contest was exactly the same as BO. Obama is the Pres of the U.S. and said he does not support gay marriage. Prejean said th same.


It is not the same thing. Prejean supports a constitutional ban. Obama does not. I don't know what part of that is not clear to you, but we're sick of explaining it. That's the difference.

[iJohnHenry]

Is there a subliminal message here?.

Just that humour is obviously wasted in PRSI.

[fivepoint]

It is not the same thing. Prejean supports a constitutional ban. Obama does not. I don't know what part of that is not clear to you, but we're sick of explaining it. That's the difference.

Are you serious? How many times does this have to be explained? READ! :confused:

[mgguy]

It is not the same thing. Prejean supports a constitutional ban.

Link please.

[leekohler]

Are you serious? How many times does this have to be explained? READ! :confused:

Please do continue to embarrass yourself. It's highly entertaining. I'm not explaining myself again.

Link please.

She's now doing an ad for these people. She sure as hell does support a constitutional ban. God this website makes me want to vomit.

http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/c.omL2KeN0LzH/b.3836955/k.BEC6/Home.htm

[fivepoint]

Please do continue to embarrass yourself. It's highly entertaining. I'm not explaining myself again.

I'm not the one throwing my hat in with the likes of Perez Hilton, verbally attacking and demonizing someone because they gave an honest answer in a beauty pageant (even before I knew whether or not that individual supported a constitutional ban on gay marriage), while at the same time supporting a candidate for President of the United States who has the same stated views on gay marriage and made it a campaign issue.

Also, please quite calling me out personally and inciting me to do the same. Talk about the issues and groups involved and stop making it personal, Lee.

I want to have a civil conversation but you keep making it personal and attempting to drag me and others into a argument with statements like "please do continue to embarrass yourself." It's not helpful.

[leekohler]

I'm not the one throwing my hat in with the likes of Perez Hilton, verbally attacking and demonizing someone because they gave an honest answer in a beauty pageant (even before I knew whether or not that individual supported a constitutional ban on gay marriage), while at the same time supporting a candidate for President of the United States who has the same stated views on gay marriage and made it a campaign issue.

Also, please quite calling me out personally and inciting me to do the same. Talk about the issues and groups involved and stop making it personal, Lee.

I want to have a civil conversation but you keep making it personal and attempting to drag me and others into a argument with statements like "please do continue to embarrass yourself." It's not helpful.

This is you trying to have a civil conversation? Really? If I continue to explain my position, and you coninue to not comprehend it, the conversation is over. She said she didn't believe in gay marriage "in my country". That said it all when I heard it-pretty damn clear to me. You what I can't believe? That you're in here defending someone like this woman.

Are you serious? How many times does this have to be explained? READ! :confused:

[mgguy]

She's now doing an ad for these people. She sure as hell does support a constitutional ban.
http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/c.omL2KeN0LzH/b.3836955/k.BEC6/Home.htm

This ad does not include any statement by Prejean other than the one she made during the pageant, which did not mention a constitutional ban against gay marriage. I'm not saying she hasn't said that she supports a ban, its just that she didn't say so in her answer to Hilton and I have not seen any reference to her having said so before or after that. Can you provide any evidence that she said this? Would you also be willing to admit that if she indeed has not said that it should be banned, that you would back off on her a little and at least not be any more pissed at her as you are to BO for holding the same opinion?

[fivepoint]

This is you trying to have a civil conversation? Really? If I continue to explain my position, and you coninue to not comprehend it, the conversation is over. She said she didn't believe in gay marriage "in my country". That said it all when I heard it-pretty damn clear to me.

Yes, I've been having a very civil conversation. Stating my views. Let's look at your examples of civil:


Oh! But she was attcked because of her wholesome morals! Oh wait... :rolleyes:

Sarcasm. Incendiary response.


And I thought lying was against the Ten Commandments. I guess it's OK as long as you're keepin' them homos in their place.

Sarcasm. Incendiary. Vague generalization of an entire group of people.



Umm...you're reaching again and embarrassing yourself. People have a right to comment on things they disagree with.

Sarcasm. Incendiary. Personal attack.


Like I said before- she's having a blast riding this all the way to the bank. Someday in the future, people like Prejean will be condemned in much the same way racists are. This whole affair has been disgusting. That people are on this forum defending her is even more disgusting.

Incendiary response. Calling members of the forum 'disgusting' for defending her right to free speech and for apparently agreeing with the POTUS while answering her question on stage.



And I certainly never admitted to any "hypoctical witch hunt". Get over yourself.

Incendiary response, telling other member to 'get over yourself'.


Anyway, I agree... conversation over. I'm interested in debating the issue, but not dealing with your one-liners and personal attacks. I'm trying to stay above these types of conversations/disagreements, because there's no need for it. We'll try it again sometime perhaps, Lee.

[leekohler]

This ad does not include any statement by Prejean other than the one she made during the pageant, which did not mention a constitutional ban against gay marriage. I'm not saying she hasn't said that she supports a ban, its just that she didn't say so in her answer to Hilton and I have not seen any reference to her having said so before or after that. Can you provide any evidence that she said this? Would you also be willing to admit that if she indeed has not said that it should be banned, that you would back off on her a little and at least not be any more pissed at her as you are to BO for holding the same opinion?

If she's doing an ad for these people, she's supporting the ban. I don't know how she couldn't be. And anyone who's part of an organization like this, isn't going to get a break from me. If you can't understand why, I don't know what to tell you.

Yes, I've been having a very civil conversation. Stating my views. Let's look at your examples of civil:




Sarcasm. Incendiary response.




Sarcasm. Incendiary. Vague generalization of an entire group of people.





Sarcasm. Incendiary. Personal attack.




Incendiary response. Calling members of the forum 'disgusting' for defending her right to free speech and for apparently agreeing with the POTUS while answering her question on stage.





Incendiary response, telling other member to 'get over yourself'.


Anyway, I agree... conversation over. I'm interested in debating the issue, but not dealing with your one-liners and personal attacks. I'm trying to stay above these types of conversations/disagreements, because there's no need for it. We'll try it again sometime perhaps, Lee.

If I'm victimizing you so, then by all means report me.

[fivepoint]

If I'm victimizing you so, then by all means report me.

It's not just me, Lee. You respond with one-liners to lots of people, and it's rarely constructive. And for the record, I don't make it a habit of reporting people unless it's way over the line.

Anyway, like I said, if we can't play nice, we should just stop now...

You can have the thread, I've said my peace. ;)

[leekohler]

It's not just me, Lee. You respond with one-liners to lots of people, and it's rarely constructive. And for the record, I don't make it a habit of reporting people unless it's way over the line.

Anyway, like I said, if we can't play nice, we should just stop now...

You can have the thread, I've said my peace. ;)

Like I said, if I so offend you, and you feel victimized, report me. You've made plenty of snarky comments to me and a lot of other people too. You don't see me crying about it.

[mactastic]

Sounds certain people in this forum begrudge Perez Hilton the same free speech rights they claim for Miss California...

[leekohler]

Sounds certain people in this forum begrudge Perez Hilton the same free speech rights they claim for Miss California...

Pretty much. Prejean is a "victim" now, and enjoying her victimhood to the fullest. She must feel so put upon. :rolleyes: I wonder how much she'll make from the ad?

[rdowns]

Give me a f@#$ing break.

Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30718342)

On the morning after Donald Trump declared she could keep her crown as Miss California USA, Carrie Prejean admitted that there may be more revealing photos of her than just the two sets that almost cost her her job.

“I’ve done many photo shoots, Matt,” Prejean told TODAY’s Matt Lauer Wednesday in New York. She said that sometimes photographers continue to take pictures when she’s dressing...



“I was right on a cliff. The wind was blowing. It was just the photographer and I,” Prejean said. “I should have been a little bit smarter. I shouldn’t have been there, probably, alone with him. But I was making adjustments … it was basically a wardrobe malfunction.”

[leekohler]

Give me a f@#$ing break.

Link (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30718342)

Thank you. That was completely ridiculous. Remember- it's OK to lie as long as you stick it to the gays.

[Gelfin]

Pretty much. Prejean is a "victim" now, and enjoying her victimhood to the fullest. She must feel so put upon. :rolleyes: I wonder how much she'll make from the ad?

Coming soon:

BURNED AT THE STAKE: The Carrie Prejean Story
Why Meanie Liberals Shouldn't Have Opinions About Things Other People Say
by Carrie Prejean
Foreword by Ann Coulter

[leekohler]

Coming soon:

BURNED AT THE STAKE: The Carrie Prejean Story
Why Meanie Liberals Shouldn't Have Opinions About Things Other People Say
by Carrie Prejean
Foreword by Ann Coulter

Oh- can we make it a movie too? It could be the first Fox News film production! :D

[Iscariot]

I'm interested in debating the issue, but not dealing with your one-liners and personal attacks.

No you're not, fivepoint. If you were, you would have provided a rebuttal to my post #80, wherein I detailed the difference between Barack Obama's position and Prejean's position as a matter of belief vs. secularism. Barack Obama has stated that he does not support a constitutional ban against gay marriage, whereas Prejean has openly supported the National Organization for Marriage, which does support legislative steps against gay marriage. Their beliefs may be the same, but their willingness to act upon them are different, and that distinction forms the incredibly important line between church and state.

If you were in fact interested in debating the issue, you would have replied to my post or other posts of it's nature, instead of continually goading on the one person for whom you knew this issue was deeply personal.

[leekohler]

No you're not, fivepoint. If you were, you would have provided a rebuttal to my post #80, wherein I detailed the difference between Barack Obama's position and Prejean's position as a matter of belief vs. secularism. Barack Obama has stated that he does not support a constitutional ban against gay marriage, whereas Prejean has openly supported the National Organization for Marriage, which does support legislative steps against gay marriage. Their beliefs may be the same, but their willingness to act upon them are different, and that distinction forms the incredibly important line between church and state.

If you were in fact interested in debating the issue, you would have replied to my post or other posts of it's nature, instead of continually goading on the one person for whom you knew this issue was deeply personal.

Which isn't unusual for him. Actually, his real purpose was to simply label people hypocrites. That was clear from his first post.

[fivepoint]

No you're not, fivepoint. If you were, you would have provided a rebuttal to my post #80, wherein I detailed the difference between Barack Obama's position and Prejean's position as a matter of belief vs. secularism. Barack Obama has stated that he does not support a constitutional ban against gay marriage, whereas Prejean has openly supported the National Organization for Marriage, which does support legislative steps against gay marriage. Their beliefs may be the same, but their willingness to act upon them are different, and that distinction forms the incredibly important line between church and state.

If you were in fact interested in debating the issue, you would have replied to my post or other posts of it's nature, instead of continually goading on the one person for whom you knew this issue was deeply personal.

I found your point to be completely irrelevant since the uproar began immediately after her initial statement which included no such indication of a stance for a constitutional ban of gay marriage. When she was called a b*tch and demonized by the gay movement, she hadn't been in any commercials or indicated any views other than those held by the POTUS. I responded to your point by responding to others with the exact same misguided issue.



Which isn't unusual for him. Actually, his real purpose was to simply label people hypocrites. That was clear from his first post.

I see it didn't take you long to get back to attacking people, Lee.

[leekohler]

I see it didn't take you long to get back to attacking people, Lee.

That wasn't an attack, fivepoint. This was your first post in this thread:

I think its hilarious that you guys are all up in a fit when she essentially has the exact same view on gay marriage as Barack Obama. :rolleyes:

You rolled your eyes at everyone and baited us. You didn't come in here to discuss this in a civil manner. Quit trying to claim you did.

[beatzfreak]

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Donald Trump's decision to let Miss California USA Carrie Prejean keep her title convinced Shanna Moakler to quit as head of the pageant's California organization.
Shanna Moakler, a former Miss USA, said she "no longer believe[s]" in the pageant organization.

Moakler, a former Miss USA, said she could not stay with Trump's Miss Universe organization "when I no longer believe in it."

As the Miss California USA co-executive director, Moakler did not hide her displeasure with Prejean during the controversy over her same-sex marriage comments and the emergence of semi-nude photos.

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/05/13/ent.miss.california.usa/

I can't say I blame her.

[mactastic]

Lies and the lying liars that tell them. A wardrobe malfunction? LOL... hilarious.

I guess rules only apply to the uggos...

[obeygiant]

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/05/13/ent.miss.california.usa/

I can't say I blame her.

Yeah you'd think she quit over Alysha Castonguay's (http://www.tmz.com/2009/05/10/miss-usa-not-all-topless-photos-are-equal/) topless images too.

I guess not all topless photos are created equal.

[MacNut]

I am more offended to see a fat dude topless than her sideboob. People need to get their offensive images in order.

[obeygiant]

I am more offended to see a fat dude topless than her sideboob. People need to get their offensive images in order.

Every time I read the word "sideboob" I think of Peter Griffen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40xVYYfMjVQ). :D

[leekohler]

Every time I read the word "sideboob" I think of Peter Griffen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40xVYYfMjVQ). :D

Shouldn't that be "manboob"? :)

[iJohnHenry]

Every time I read the word "sideboob" I think of Peter Griffen (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40xVYYfMjVQ). :D

It has been mentioned earlier.

Side boob is just skin. No nipple was seen. This was just as idiotic excuse to try and strip her crown due to her personal beliefs.

Nice, if you can get away with it. As far as I am aware, she does not hold a position of public office which which to ply her evil plan. :rolleyes:

[leekohler]

It has been mentioned earlier.

Side boob is just skin. No nipple was seen. This was just as idiotic excuse to try and strip her crown due to her personal beliefs.

Nice, if you can get away with it. As far as I am aware, she does not hold a position of public office which which to ply her evil plan. :rolleyes:

No partial nudity was also a stipulation of the contract. And while she may not hold public office, she sure couldn't wait to do that ad. Like it or not, she's going to get criticized for it, and loudly.

[beatzfreak]

Yeah you'd think she quit over Alysha Castonguay's (http://www.tmz.com/2009/05/10/miss-usa-not-all-topless-photos-are-equal/) topless images too.

I guess not all topless photos are created equal.

This difference is Alysha Castonguay disclosed her photos and Carrie Prejean lied about hers. Rules are rules.

[Iscariot]

I found your point to be completely irrelevant since the uproar began immediately after her initial statement which included no such indication of a stance for a constitutional ban of gay marriage. When she was called a b*tch and demonized by the gay movement, she hadn't been in any commercials or indicated any views other than those held by the POTUS. I responded to your point by responding to others with the exact same misguided issue.

It's only irrelevant if you frame the incident insofar as what that idiot Perez Hilton had to say. This forum topic was started on May 7, 2009, and the commercial began airing on or before the first of May. If you want to frame the discussion only on events whose relevance has since changed, there's a much older forum topic you should be directing your no longer relevant viewpoints to. And the only reason I can see for framing the discussion on the irrelevant and outdated Perez Hilton word-vomit is to intentionally focus on what is little more than outrage-baiting. There is nothing "misguided" in addressing the issue in it's totality.

Additionally, even if you ignore the commercial and everything outside of the initial statements made by Carrie Prejean and Barack Obama, there is still a distinctive difference between the two. Prejean may not have initially let her view of the position of the State be known, but Obama absolutely did, stating his unwillingness to support a constitutional ban. While I agree that this is differentiating between shades of gray, to state that the two views are equal is to intentionally obscure comprehension for the purposes of, well, trolling.
demonized by the gay movement

I wasn't aware that Perez Hilton and Leekohler were the mouthpieces of the gay movement. Were they democratically elected, or appointed by a special panel? I would personally vote for Ashton Kutcher, while he may not be gay, he sure is dreamy.

[MacNut]

No partial nudity was also a stipulation of the contract. And while she may not hold public office, she sure couldn't wait to do that ad. Like it or not, she's going to get criticized for it, and loudly.Not to argue what partial nudity is but when they walk around in bikinis isn't that considered partial, I don't see that being taken out of the competition. Why not call this what it really is, "The lets look at hot chicks parade on stage pageant". Not that I am complaining but seriously.

[NT1440]

Not to argue what partial nudity is but when they walk around in bikinis isn't that considered partial, I don't see that being taken out of the competition. Why not call this what it really is, the lets look at hot chicks parade on stage. Not that I am complaining but seriously.

America has an amazing ability to both LOVE sexuality, but have such a problem with anything resembling even the slightest bit of nudity we look like quakers to the rest of the world.

Go figure.

[Sun Baked]

I wasn't aware that Perez Hilton and Leekohler were the mouthpieces of the gay movement. Were they democratically elected, or appointed by a special panel? I would personally vote for Ashton Kutcher, while he may not be gay, he sure is dreamy.

I don't know that weird/close relationship between him and Bruce Willis almost makes me think they all jump into bed with Demi for 3-somes making me think at least bi.

[MacNut]

America has an amazing ability to both LOVE sexuality, but have such a problem with anything resembling even the slightest bit of nudity we look like quakers to the rest of the world.

Go figure.I agree but for them to be getting upset over some "nude photos" while the swimsuit competition isn't much different is just odd to me.

[NT1440]

I agree but for them to be getting upset over some "nude photos" while the swimsuit competition isn't much different is just odd to me.

Oh its not odd to me at all. When being PC we Americans are as hypocritical as it gets.

[mactastic]

I agree but for them to be getting upset over some "nude photos" while the swimsuit competition isn't much different is just odd to me.
Oh I heartily agree. The idea that they fault these girls for getting slightly more naked in a photo than they do onstage seems stupid and anachronistic.

However; call me old-fashioned, but I still find lying on an application and breach of contract to be something worthy of condemnation. That said, this is a freakin' beauty pageant. Seriously, who effin cares? If The Donald wants to allow hot chicks to flout the rules because they're hot chicks, that's his total prerogative. He owns the pageant, and can make up or ignore any of the so-called rules that he wants.

He might as well eliminate the question about partial nudity from the form now though, no future contestant is going to take it seriously.

[mgguy]

The contract she signed may not allow what she did, but I don't believe the contract requires her title to be taken away for violating the rules. Clearly, the final decision was the Donald's, and he chose to keep her on. So all is working as it should in that regard.

In any event, the focus on her and whether she broke the contract rules is really kind of silly. Who cares? More importantly, we have a president who advocates that marriage should be between a man and a woman. That is far more important and influential. While he said he does not support a constitutional ban, he really hasn't done anything to try to block it. It's like he's giving lip service (no pun intended) against a ban just to cover himself politically. When was the last time you heard him speak out about this? I think the focus has been put on her to deflect attention away from BO's opposition to gay marriage.

[solvs]

What the problem about this really is, is that people like her want others to have to live with THEIR beliefs, beliefs they seem to neither understand, nor, like the case with lying, half-nudie, mcfake-boobs here, actually follow themselves. They vote against rights for others, and join orgs like NOM that seek to ban gay rights, because of THEIR beliefs, ignoring that maybe not everyone believes the way they do, and it doesn't affect them one way or the other if gays do get married, despite the scare tactics. Scratch that, actually gay marriage has shown to help economically, so they're actually voting against their best interest. Again.

Worse, she complains and cries about her rights being violated. As if she wasn't hypocritical enough, and didn't understand her own religion anymore than live by it like she expects others to, she also doesn't seem to understand that her Freedom of Speech wasn't violated by the gov, which is what Free Speech is, and that it goes both ways. While she can say whatever she wants, doesn't mean there aren't consequences, especially when it was a private business who rules she was supposed to be abiding by (remember that righties, the business rights you defend so fervently), and that we also have every right to respond to her. Especially considering what she has done to try to further a cause that, ironically enough, wants to prevent and even take rights away from others.

Cry me a river that some people are intolerant of your intolerance, especially when you don't seem to have any idea what you're talking about.

I think its hilarious that you guys are all up in a fit when she essentially has the exact same view on gay marriage as Barack Obama.
Actually, I pointed this out two or more times earlier in this thread. This refusal to hold BO to the same standards as others is nothing new here. It must be stressful to know that someone they support so strongly holds views that they hate and can't criticize him for with the same intensity that they can this woman.
It is hypocritical because the witch hunt and uproar started immediately after she claimed to have the exact same views as BO.

BTW, "All hail Obama!"
First of all, take a quick look at the thread about Obama's decision to not release the rest of the torture photos to see how we feel when Obama does something we don't like. Just because some of you are partisan hacks who support your guys no matter what doesn't mean we are. Second, as has been pointed out, their views are actually different. Third, surprise, some people are actually pissed at Obama because their views aren't different enough. It's something he's being criticized by the gay community over, as he also is right now over DADT. So as someone who thinks he's wrong too, no matter what the reason (which is obviously political reasoning, which to some of us is worse than just being a myopic Bible thumper), the hypocrisy's still not where some of you claim it to be.

In a supposedly free country gays deserve the rights, whether people like her try to stop them from getting them, or people like Obama stand idly by so as not to piss people like her off, or not.

[solvs]

Olbermann's take:

New W.T.F. segment (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677#30711675)

Apparently Satan was tempting her. :rolleyes:

[leekohler]

What the problem about this really is, is that people like her want others to have to live with THEIR beliefs, beliefs they seem to neither understand, nor, like the case with lying, half-nudie, mcfake-boobs here, actually follow themselves. They vote against rights for others, and join orgs like NOM that seek to ban gay rights, because of THEIR beliefs, ignoring that maybe not everyone believes the way they do, and it doesn't affect them one way or the other if gays do get married, despite the scare tactics. Scratch that, actually gay marriage has shown to help economically, so they're actually voting against their best interest. Again.

Worse, she complains and cries about her rights being violated. As if she wasn't hypocritical enough, and didn't understand her own religion anymore than live by it like she expects others to, she also doesn't seem to understand that her Freedom of Speech wasn't violated by the gov, which is what Free Speech is, and that it goes both ways. While she can say whatever she wants, doesn't mean there aren't consequences, especially when it was a private business who rules she was supposed to be abiding by (remember that righties, the business rights you defend so fervently), and that we also have every right to respond to her. Especially considering what she has done to try to further a cause that, ironically enough, wants to prevent and even take rights away from others.

Cry me a river that some people are intolerant of your intolerance, especially when you don't seem to have any idea what you're talking about.




First of all, take a quick look at the thread about Obama's decision to not release the rest of the torture photos to see how we feel when Obama does something we don't like. Just because some of you are partisan hacks who support your guys no matter what doesn't mean we are. Second, as has been pointed out, their views are actually different. Third, surprise, some people are actually pissed at Obama because their views aren't different enough. It's something he's being criticized by the gay community over, as he also is right now over DADT. So as someone who thinks he's wrong too, no matter what the reason (which is obviously political reasoning, which to some of us is worse than just being a myopic Bible thumper), the hypocrisy's still not where some of you claim it to be.

In a supposedly free country gays deserve the rights, whether people like her try to stop them from getting them, or people like Obama stand idly by so as not to piss people like her off, or not.

Thank you, solvs. Hopefully, this will be understood.

[solvs]

Thank you, solvs. Hopefully, this will be understood.

It won't be by those who need to get it most, but thank you.

[yg17]

So now Sarah Palin has chimed in and basically said that she is proud of Prejean because she said what was on her mind and that first amendment rights don't apply only to those who agree with the far left.

So, if this really is a legit first amendment issue, when did the Miss USA pageant become an official government division? I must've missed the memo. Those socialist Democrats are taking over everything! :rolleyes:

[Gelfin]

when did the Miss USA pageant become an official government division?

It was in the same bill that gave "President of the Senate" actual legislative authority.

[leekohler]

So now Sarah Palin has chimed in and basically said that she is proud of Prejean because she said what was on her mind and that first amendment rights don't apply only to those who agree with the far left.

So, if this really is a legit first amendment issue, when did the Miss USA pageant become an official government division? I must've missed the memo. Those socialist Democrats are taking over everything! :rolleyes:

What is with these crackheads? Someone gets criticized for saying something crappy and all of a sudden it's a freedom of speech issue? It's NOT! OMG! Thank god Palin never got elected. Can you imagine where we'd be right now? :eek:

[beatzfreak]

Carrie Prejean needs a theme song ala Rush Limbaugh stylee.

Carrie the Topless Christian, sung to the tune of Puff the Magic Dragon.

She does live by the sea.

[leekohler]

Carrie Prejean needs a theme song ala Rush Limbaugh stylee.

Carrie the Topless Christian, sung to the tune of Puff the Magic Dragon.

She does live by the sea.

I like it. We can start the movie of her life with it. :)

[yg17]

How about to the tune of Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer instead? It would be catchier

Carrie the topless christian
Had very small boobies
And after everyone saw them
She wanted a pair of double Ds

Anyone want to do the next verse? I think I'm already getting writers block :D

[leekohler]

How about to the tune of Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer instead? It would be catchier

Carrie the topless christian
Had very small boobies
And after everyone saw them
She wanted a pair of double Ds

Anyone want to do the next verse? I think I'm already getting writers block :D

That's a good start. :)

[beatzfreak]

How about to the tune of Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer instead? It would be catchier

Carrie the topless christian
Had very small boobies
And after everyone saw them
She wanted a pair of double Ds

Anyone want to do the next verse? I think I'm already getting writers block :D

All of the other models
used to laugh and call her names.
They never let poor Carrie
pose with all the other dames.

Then one shiny Cali day
Donald came to say:
"Carrie with your boobs so small,
change 'em and you can have it all" :D

[leekohler]

All of the other models
used to laugh and call her names.
They never let poor Carrie
pose with all the other dames.

Then one shiny Cali day
Donald came to say:
"Carrie with your boobs so small,
change 'em and you can have it all" :D

Love it! :)

[obeygiant]

How about to the tune of Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer instead? It would be catchier

Carrie the topless christian
Had very small boobies
And after everyone saw them
She wanted a pair of double Ds


This is now the 4th grade edition of the Miss America thread.

[Counterfit]

They're already fake! The Miss California pageant officials payed for 'em!!! (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30495983/)
Hmm, she'll need to upgrade then. And her hair color is still too natural...
Indeed, nothing screams "wholesome Christian family values" like spreading your legs for the camera...
That would be Penthouse, not Playboy. :p
If I spread my legs for the camera, I'd go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

Maybe I just need to find the right camera :D
Traffic cameras are usually a bad target for nudity...

So now Sarah Palin has chimed in and basically said that she is proud of Prejean because she said what was on her mind and that first amendment rights don't apply only to those who agree with the far left.

It was in the same bill that gave "President of the Senate" actual legislative authority.

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/political-pictures-sarah-palin-alaska-politics.jpg (http://punditkitchen.com/2009/05/14/political-pictures-sarah-palin-alaska-politics/)

Pretty accurate.

[yg17]

Traffic cameras are usually a bad target for nudity...

It depends if you're the passenger or driver :D

[Torajima]

Sorry... didn't realize this was an old thread! Response deleted.

[rdowns]

Miss California USA Prejean dethroned

Link (http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/06/10/prejean.dethroned/index.html)


LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Carrie Prejean has been dethroned as Miss California USA for "contract violations," including missing scheduled pageant events, according to a state pageant official.

Prejean, 22, retained her title last month despite a controversy over topless photos, missed appearances and her statements against same-sex marriage.

Miss USA pageant owner Donald Trump decided to fire Prejean a month after he gave her a second chance.

"Carrie is a beautiful young woman, and I wish her well as she pursues her other interests," Trump said.

Runner-up Tami Farrell, who was Miss Malibu, will immediately assume the Miss California USA title, state pageant Executive Director Keith Lewis said.

"This was a decision based solely on contract violations, including Ms. Prejean's unwillingness to make appearances on behalf of the Miss California USA organization," he said.

[mactastic]

Well... Trump owns the thing, so it's his right to make the decision.

[Counterfit]

$10 she claims it's because of her views on marriage. :rolleyes:

[leekohler]

$10 she claims it's because of her views on marriage. :rolleyes:

Well, of course. That's a given.

[mactastic]

$10 she claims it's because of her views on marriage. :rolleyes:
Not just her either...

[leekohler]

Not just her either...

That's another given. I wonder if she'll do more commercials now? ;)

[mactastic]

That's another given. I wonder if she'll do more commercials now? ;)
Might as well. No reason not to now...

[Dont Hurt Me]

Crown or no crown she is still a hot tamale!

[rdowns]

Yeah, I know, TMZ. (http://www.tmz.com/2009/11/04/carrie-prejean-sex-tape-settlement-miss-california-usa-pagneat/)


Carrie Prejean demanded more than a million dollars during her settlement negotiations with Miss California USA Pageant officials -- that is, until the lawyer for the Pageant showed Carrie an XXX home video of her handiwork.

The video the lawyer showed Carrie is extremely graphic and has never been released publicly. We know that, because TMZ obtained the video months ago but decided not to post it because it was so racy. Let's just say, Carrie has a promising solo career.

We're told it took about 15 seconds for Carrie to jettison her demand and essentially walk away with nothing. As we first reported, the Pageant is paying around $100,000 to her lawyers and publicist -- a fraction of her bills. She pockets nothing in the settlement.

Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2009/11/04/carrie-prejean-sex-tape-settlement-miss-california-usa-pagneat/#ixzz0Vvv5wYVi