Miss California chastised for having an opinion

A place to share your views and make your case on any issues fit to discuss.

Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat

Grizlaw
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3274
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:04 pm
Location: Queens, NY

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by Grizlaw » Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:13 pm

tampa_griz wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:
tampa_griz wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:Riiiiigggghhht. You jumped the shark trying to stay consistent on that argument, tampa. :D
Wasn't me that went from "racist and bigoted" to "unjust". That was you.
Another swing and miss.
Wrong. It's exactly the way the conversation went.
Well I wasn't involved in the initial exchange, so hopefully I can chime in without being accused of shifting gears mid-argument.

But tampa -- without getting into whether a law that denies people of different races to marry is "racist," are you trying to argue that it's fine for a law to be unjust, as long as it's not racist or bigoted?


I work as an attorney so that I can afford good scotch, which helps me to forget that I work as an attorney.

User avatar
AlphaGriz1
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:13 pm
Location: Dominating BN since 1997............

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by AlphaGriz1 » Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:37 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
GOKATS wrote:All she did was honestly state her opinion based on her values and the way she was raised, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Why in the hell would gay men attend the Miss USA pageant other than for some political agenda or to make a statement. :(
I agree. There's absolutely nothing wrong with her stating her opinion ... and absolutely nothing wrong with gay men speaking their opinions about her discriminatory views.

While the gay men themselves are being bigoted..............wouldn't want you to forget that.


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
www.maroonblood.com
www.championshipsubdivision.com

User avatar
AlphaGriz1
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 10209
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:13 pm
Location: Dominating BN since 1997............

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by AlphaGriz1 » Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:42 pm

The point that is being missed here is that right now in our once proud country it is not a good idea to voice your opinion when dealing with cockgobblers.

they will paint you into a corner and it's OK for them to berate you and call you for instance "stupid bit*h" with no repercussions on them for being sexist and bigoted.

The whole principal is gay.


A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
www.maroonblood.com
www.championshipsubdivision.com

User avatar
ImagineSanta
2nd Team All-BobcatNation
Posts: 1076
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:59 pm
Location: 59102

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by ImagineSanta » Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:23 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
GOKATS wrote:All she did was honestly state her opinion based on her values and the way she was raised, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Why in the hell would gay men attend the Miss USA pageant other than for some political agenda or to make a statement. :(
I agree. There's absolutely nothing wrong with her stating her opinion ... and absolutely nothing wrong with gay men speaking their opinions about her discriminatory views.
Imagine! Someone from San Francisco who thinks that being against gay marriage, even though it's their own opinion, which is granted to them by the first amendment in which the gay people are allowed to use as well, is discriminatory. It's a double standard. If you hate us for our opinion, it's discrimination, but if we hate you for your opinion, it's free speech.


I think you don't get it. Sleeping in until 6 won't get many people very far in life, especially if they want to play on Sunday.
-Cat Grad

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23938
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by SonomaCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:31 pm

ImagineSanta wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:
GOKATS wrote:All she did was honestly state her opinion based on her values and the way she was raised, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Why in the hell would gay men attend the Miss USA pageant other than for some political agenda or to make a statement. :(
I agree. There's absolutely nothing wrong with her stating her opinion ... and absolutely nothing wrong with gay men speaking their opinions about her discriminatory views.
Imagine! Someone from San Francisco who thinks that being against gay marriage, even though it's their own opinion, which is granted to them by the first amendment in which the gay people are allowed to use as well, is discriminatory. It's a double standard. If you hate us for our opinion, it's discrimination, but if we hate you for your opinion, it's free speech.
1. It is, by definition, discriminatory. For anyone who understands the concept, this is not a matter of debate.

2. I explicitly stated that it was perfectly fine for her to say whatever she wants, and that it was perfectly fine for people to speak out against her. So your "First Amendment" bit makes absolutely no sense at all. In fact, you quoted my actual statement that explicitly contradicts what you wrote. Did you misread my statement, or was the logic just not clicking for you?

3. I never said advocated or condoned anyone hating anyone else. In fact ... that's the exact opposite of what I condone.

By the way ... how would you feel if somebody used your exact same arguments to support someone who proclaimed that black people shouldn't be allowed to vote? Let's try it on:
Imagine! One of those northern agitators who thinks that being against blacks voting, even though it's their own opinion, which is granted to them by the first amendment in which the black people are allowed to use as well, is discriminatory. It's a double standard. If you hate us for our opinion, it's discrimination, but if we hate you for your opinion, it's free speech.



User avatar
Bleedinbluengold
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3427
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:24 am
Location: Belly of the Beast

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by Bleedinbluengold » Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:35 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
ImagineSanta wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:
GOKATS wrote:All she did was honestly state her opinion based on her values and the way she was raised, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Why in the hell would gay men attend the Miss USA pageant other than for some political agenda or to make a statement. :(
I agree. There's absolutely nothing wrong with her stating her opinion ... and absolutely nothing wrong with gay men speaking their opinions about her discriminatory views.
Imagine! Someone from San Francisco who thinks that being against gay marriage, even though it's their own opinion, which is granted to them by the first amendment in which the gay people are allowed to use as well, is discriminatory. It's a double standard. If you hate us for our opinion, it's discrimination, but if we hate you for your opinion, it's free speech.
1. It is, by definition, discriminatory. For anyone who understands the concept, this is not a matter of debate.

2. I explicitly stated that it was perfectly fine for her to say whatever she wants, and that it was perfectly fine for people to speak out against her. So your "First Amendment" bit makes absolutely no sense at all. In fact, you quoted my actual statement that explicitly contradicts what you wrote. Did you misread my statement, or was the logic just not clicking for you?

3. I never said advocated or condoned anyone hating anyone else. In fact ... that's the exact opposite of what I condone.

By the way ... how would you feel if somebody used your exact same arguments to support someone who proclaimed that black people shouldn't be allowed to vote? Let's try it on:
Imagine! One of those northern agitators who thinks that being against blacks voting, even though it's their own opinion, which is granted to them by the first amendment in which the black people are allowed to use as well, is discriminatory. It's a double standard. If you hate us for our opinion, it's discrimination, but if we hate you for your opinion, it's free speech.
Is this not what various State supreme courts are figuring out now, and the US Supreme Court has avoided studying? I admit that I did not do one google search about this, but I don't remember a definitive ruling on the equal protection aspect with respect to gay and lesbian issue(s).


Montana State IS what "they" think Montana is.

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23938
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by SonomaCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:45 pm

Just to clarify (although I don't think you meant to suggest this by your post -- I just can't be too careful when it comes to clarifying things on public boards), I was only saying the beauty queen's opinion is, by definition, discriminatory (not that I have ever really cared what any beauty queen has to say about issues of real importance). I wasn't speaking to the legal aspects of Equal Protection in my post, although that is a nice segue to a discussion that probably is a lot more relevant than any beauty queen talk.

So if we do address equal protection standards, I think you've summed it up well. Some states have reached that conclusion, but it hasn't taken at the federal level yet.



User avatar
Bleedinbluengold
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3427
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:24 am
Location: Belly of the Beast

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by Bleedinbluengold » Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:58 pm

Is that she said that she thinks marriage is between a man and a woman the part that you say was discriminatory?

Ya know, if the pagent had done its job to begin with, they would have discriminated against any particpant who did not openly affirm their support of gay rights, and any other belief that the pagent holds dear, and not let them in the pagent to begin with. I mean, heck, if you're openly "saddened" about opinions such as Miss California, then why even let someone like that play at all?

Pagents are discriminatory by default, right? There's no debate about that. What's the big surprise?


Montana State IS what "they" think Montana is.

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23938
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by SonomaCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:21 pm

Bleedinbluengold wrote:Is that she said that she thinks marriage is between a man and a woman the part that you say was discriminatory?
If you insert the word "only" in front of "between" (which her actual words strongly suggested) and put it in the context of what she believes the law should be, then yes, she would be advocating a law that is discriminatory. Not that all laws that are discriminatory are inherently bad (or unjust), of course. This just happens to be one that is.
Pagents are discriminatory by default, right?
Absolutely.



User avatar
Bleedinbluengold
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3427
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:24 am
Location: Belly of the Beast

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by Bleedinbluengold » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:40 pm

You might be giving her more credit for *thinking* than she should get. I read her quote again, and I'd have to say that she didn't, in fact, strongly suggest (as you suggest) that marriage should "only" be between a man and a woman.

I guess if she were really "thinking" she would have responded with, "I believe in God, and I don't believe in false gods. Are you asking if I should believe in gay marriage instead of God? That's all I have to say about what I believe. If, on the other hand, you are asking me whether, or not, I support gay marriage, I support anyone who feels they are being discriminated against, and are using our great judicial system and representative democracy to resolve their issue in a peaceful manner."

Man, could you imagine that? I bet several folks at the pagent would just spontaneously burst into flames! Now, that would be good t.v.!!!

That gives me an idea: One part of the competition should be that random contestants, judges and spectators should just arbitrarily catch fire. I bet it would be the highest rated show on t.v.


Montana State IS what "they" think Montana is.

ChiOCat
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3456
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:25 pm
Location: Down Under

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by ChiOCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:44 pm

Such as.....such as.....maps....such as...... :wink:

It was her opinion. And the way she phrased it didn't even really make sense...such as....


"We are all vulnerable, and all fallible, with mortality our only certainty..." - Dr Kenneth Bock

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23938
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by SonomaCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:25 pm

Bleedinbluengold wrote:You might be giving her more credit for *thinking* than she should get. I read her quote again, and I'd have to say that she didn't, in fact, strongly suggest (as you suggest) that marriage should "only" be between a man and a woman.
When somebody asks you if you support gay marriage, and you respond that you believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, the "only" is certainly suggested (if not shouted).



User avatar
cats2506
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7581
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Lewistown

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by cats2506 » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:26 pm

I suppose the Creator is discriminatory too, since same sex partners are naturally unable to have offspring to.

Why dont they petition for that right first, and once it is granted I will buy into the whole "gay marriage" think.


PlayerRep wrote:The point is not the record of the teams UM beat, it's the quality and record of the teams UM almost beat.

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23938
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by SonomaCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:30 pm

cats2506 wrote:I suppose the Creator is discriminatory too, since same sex partners are naturally unable to have offspring to.

Why dont they petition for that right first, and once it is granted I will buy into the whole "gay marriage" think.
Are you opposed to heterosexual people who don't want to have kids (or are physically unable to have kids) getting married?



User avatar
Bleedinbluengold
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3427
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:24 am
Location: Belly of the Beast

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by Bleedinbluengold » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:35 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
Bleedinbluengold wrote:You might be giving her more credit for *thinking* than she should get. I read her quote again, and I'd have to say that she didn't, in fact, strongly suggest (as you suggest) that marriage should "only" be between a man and a woman.
When somebody asks you if you support gay marriage, and you respond that you believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, the "only" is certainly suggested (if not shouted).
If we're being technical here, then Hilton didn't ask whether Miss California supported gay marriage, Hilton asked if Miss California believed in gay marriage....There is a HUGE difference between those two questions - both technically, and figuratively.

I disagree completely that the "only" is suggested, let alone shouted. Especially by virtue of the fact that she led that part of her response by implying that she felt fortunate to grow up in America where you enjoy freedoms that other societies don't enjoy.


Montana State IS what "they" think Montana is.

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23938
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by SonomaCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:46 pm

"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. 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."
It certainly sounds like she is suggesting that she advocates the "only" position to me ... and to most everyone who responded to her comments so far (on both sides of the issue).

Maybe she was really just saying that she meant that everyone, gay or straight, should be allowed to marry whoever they choose (and merely meant that a man and a woman was just one example of a marriage), and she was just misunderstood. I concede that this is possible. But if that was the case, I assume her people would have put out a press release clearing up that confusion by now.



User avatar
cats2506
Golden Bobcat
Posts: 7581
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Lewistown

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by cats2506 » Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:53 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
cats2506 wrote:I suppose the Creator is discriminatory too, since same sex partners are naturally unable to have offspring to.

Why dont they petition for that right first, and once it is granted I will buy into the whole "gay marriage" think.
Are you opposed to heterosexual people who don't want to have kids (or are physically unable to have kids) getting married?
When you consider the natural and evolutionary things that have cause our species to become monogamous, reproduction and protection of the offspring are the principal reasons.

I don’t care what other people do in their bedrooms, but that has nothing to do with marriage.


PlayerRep wrote:The point is not the record of the teams UM beat, it's the quality and record of the teams UM almost beat.

User avatar
Bleedinbluengold
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3427
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 10:24 am
Location: Belly of the Beast

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by Bleedinbluengold » Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:11 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. 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."
It certainly sounds like she is suggesting that she advocates the "only" position to me ... and to most everyone who responded to her comments so far (on both sides of the issue).

Maybe she was really just saying that she meant that everyone, gay or straight, should be allowed to marry whoever they choose (and merely meant that a man and a woman was just one example of a marriage), and she was just misunderstood. I concede that this is possible. But if that was the case, I assume her people would have put out a press release clearing up that confusion by now.
Sounds to me like she believes, "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite." And, that she thinks "that a marriage should be between a man and a woman." She is implying that you may believe differently, and she's cool with that, because "we live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite." She's probably just sending a message to all the lesbians in the audience to forget about hitting on her, 'cause she's hetero. :wink:

If she meant that she thinks that marriage should "only" be between a man and a woman, why would she say, "we live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite?"


Montana State IS what "they" think Montana is.

User avatar
SonomaCat
Moderator
Posts: 23938
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:56 pm
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Contact:

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by SonomaCat » Mon Apr 20, 2009 5:34 pm

Bleedinbluengold wrote:If she meant that she thinks that marriage should "only" be between a man and a woman, why would she say, "we live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite?"
Who knows what that was supposed to mean ... it doesn't make a whole lot of sense (especially seeing as how we don't live in such a land).

Okay, let's just cut to the chase ... does anyone REALLY care what this woman thinks? And does anyone REALLY care what the gay guys who run the pageants said in response? Have we all wasted too much of our life trying to interpret the mangled words of a probably not-incredibly-bright beauty queen? Let's give her twenty years and fear her words only after she is annouced as a V.P. candidate. :wink:

She utilized her First Amendment rights to sorta kinda express an opinion, and others utilized their First Amendment rights to voice their disapproval of her words. The government is not censoring any parties involved, so it's all good.



User avatar
TIrwin24
BobcatNation Hall of Famer
Posts: 3526
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Bow, WA

Re: Miss California chastised for having an opinion

Post by TIrwin24 » Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:54 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:

She utilized her First Amendment rights to sorta kinda express an opinion, and others utilized their First Amendment rights to voice their disapproval of her words. The government is not censoring any parties involved, so it's all good.
I think her opinion was very clear. I applaud her for sticking to her beliefs and not resorting to bullsh*t with her answer.


Image

"I've always followed in my father's footsteps, not necessarily because I wanted to, but because it is in my spirit."

-Singlefin Yellow

Post Reply