Last night on FoxNews’s O’Reilly Factor with Laura Ingraham substituting for the show’s eponymous host, feminist Gloria Feldt said Miss California, Carrie Prejean, needed a “heart transplant.” So, since that young woman has offered a position on gay marriage nearly identical to that of the President of the United States, does this feminist believe that Barack Obama needs a “heart transplant” as well?
Here’s what Miss Prejean said about gay marriage:
Well I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman.
Note her answer was prompted by a question. In his book, The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream, Barack Obama volunteered (without prompting) that he is “opposed to same-sex marriage:”
I believe that American society can choose to carve out a special place for the union of a man and a woman as the unit of child rearing most common to every culture.
Now, contrast the two statements. Prejean didn’t say she was opposed to gay marriage, she merely said she favored traditional marriage. It was the Democrat who indicated his opposition. Interesting that.
The hypocrisy of the Left on this manner is telling. Now, I know Miss Prejean has become the spokesmodel or some such for some pro-traditional marriage outfit (of which I had never previously heard). I wouldn’t have known about this had gay marriage advocates pointed it out.
Once again, they’re giving her a bigger platform. Let me repeat something I’ve said before: ignore her. It’s her critics who have made her name more familiar than that of the woman who won the pageant. You know her name, “but can you name this year’s Miss USA?”
And if you’re going to criticize her, at least hold others who have made public statements advocating traditional marriage to the same standard.
Some of us don’t want to ignore her. I agree that ‘traditional’ marriage (or as I call it, ‘real’ marriage) is and should be between a man and a woman. That doesn’t preclude supporting civil unions, a different and separate institution. If you want gay marriage so badly, go find a willing lesbian and get hitched.
Uh..You are of course aware that Ms. Prejean joined an organization led by those that fight civil unions too. And support criminalization of being Gay.
She is inarticulate and deeply flawed. To have a 20 year old ‘vanity’ contest runner-up who had plastic surgery to compete in a bikini bleeting on about traditional values and religion isn’t going to be very persuasive. I wonder what the Bible says about modesty. And how that would relate to parading around nearly naked on TV.
Sure Maggie might get some more $$$$ out of this, but I don’t see this moving the debate for the right wing.
Also, you might be a bit more credible attacking people criticizing Ms. Prejean for her political stances on Gays, if you would man up and make some comments about Rep. Virgnia Foxx. Even anti-Gay US Republican Senator Richard Burr commented unfavorably towards her.
I mean the statement is kinda blah to me, I don’t see her as being anti-gay marriage. The first line seems to be the throw to the gay marriage supporters, that she doesn’t mind if people choose one or the other but she feels this way. If she really believes people should have a choice than she should support gay marriage laws being enacted, so people have a choice.
Actually, Tom, it was your side that made her into a powerful symbol. If you guys could tolerate people who disagree with you without clutching the pearls, getting the vapors, and throwing Category 5 hissy-fits, she’d be just a footnote.
I’m not concerned with her being more than a footnote. She’s inarticulate, and deeply flawed as a morals spokesperson. She can bleet on FOX News and on AM Radio all she wants to.
Lets see, National Organization for Marriage founded by former single mother Maggie Gallagher, has a board member who advocates the criminalization of being Gay, and has a spokesperson who advocates morality by parading around nearly naked with fake breasts. I think that’s the team I want to go up against.
Meanwhile, NH and ME are on the verge of passing marriage equality.
“even anti-Gay Senator Richard Burr”
Oh Lord. There are boogeymen everywhere for you Tom, aren’t there?
Uh..Bruce,
Didn’t Burr run for office using anti-Gay TV ads in 2004? That’s where I’m coming from on him. Not all Republicans are anti-Gay, but if you run for office highlighting your opposition to Gay rights, I don’t think its an unreasonable assertion.
But I’ll give you an opportunity to debunk my assertion about Richard Burr. From what I remember, either you or the other Gaypatriot may have been in NC during the election. Did he not run for office using ads attacking Gay marriage or highlighting his opposition to it? Has he backed away from those assertions? Has he supported any Gay rights plank? On issues where there is some third derivative Gay benefit (eg. Social Security repeal), did he highlight the Gay benefit (or was it completely coincidental)? How is he on HIV/AIDS education funding that actually reaches Gay men that are not lifelong celebates?
Once you’re done with that, you might also wish to discuss Virginia Foxx. You know it makes GOProud!/gaypatriot look pretty weak in my opinion if you don’t have a comment about it. You know, I think even the conservatives would expect you to comment on it seeing as you purport to represent the Conservative Gay community to the Conservative Republican movement. Please also note that Ms. Foxx has not recanted her assertion that the victim’s sexual orientation had nothing to do with the crime.
Tom-
When the Stonewall Dems, NGLTF, HRC or Gill Foundation have something to say about how US Rep. Barney Frank (D, Gay-MA) is being let slide from his responsibility for our global fiscal crisis, then maybe I’ll feel compelled to discuss Foxx or Burr.
Meanwhile, aren’t we all lucky you troll here so you can help on that accord.
Uh, any comments on Burr’s 2004 Senate Campaign?
Uh..HRC (I’m not a member – I got pissed at them over delaying DADT too) and the other groups aren’t really primarily concerned with Economic issues that aren’t Gay related
Don’t be upset if you aren’t considered a major Gay blog (I remember some of you were a bit pissed about it) that or a voice of the Gay community when you don’t speak to the issues of the day.
Seriously, there is a role for Gaypatriot and GOProud! that isn’t confrontational to the Gay mainstream while simultaneously working for your stated goals. But I don’t think an unhealthy emphasis on attacking Barney Frank (and I’m not his biggest fan) is going to do much more than feed a perception that some are just embarrassed of Gay mainstream culture or his lisp. And it isn’t going to help you be less marginalized in the Gay community. Come on guys, its starting to look really bad, this huge emphasis on Barney Frank. He’s not the most powerful person in the US Congress. Why don’t you do something useful, like go after Nancy Pelosi, who can’t seem to lead the Democrats on DADT repeal (which as far as I can tell is the only area where you agree with the Gay mainstream). Perhaps highlight your support of that. You know, there actually be times when you could actually highlight someone like Anh Cao (R-La) or go after Democrats who actually are working against Gay rights (there are about 20 of them)
So some of you guys don’t support inclusion of sexual orientation in existing Federal hate crimes laws. Do you really think highlighting that oppostion is going to do much to earn you credibility with the Gay mainstream? Do you think that is going to attract people to your group? Or is that just going to push people away who may have supporters of your group on other issues?
Do you really have to flip the bird at the Gay mainstream? If you do, don’t complain when they belittle or margainalize you.
You know, there ARE ways of attacking bad behavior of the GOP that doesn’t necessarily entail supporting the Democrats. For example, “While we don’t necessarily support Democrat xy, we wish to condemn Rep. Foxx’s assertion that Matt Shepard’s sexual orientation was not a motivation for his murder and call on her to restract that assertion”. You haven’t said you support the Matt Shepard Act, you haven’t supported a Democrat. You’ve also established yourselves as a ‘go to group’ for the Conservatives on Gay issues. Right now, a major news event to the Gay community happened (Foxx’s comments and the House passage of the Matt Shepard Act) and what is the response of GOProud! Birds chirping. If you are a Gay organization, you should opine on issues in the Gay community. And pehaps try to do it in a way that isn’t confrontational.
GOProud!/gaypatriot isn’t just talking to Tom in Lazybrook now. You claim to be a public policy group. Think about responding as if you weren’t responding to someone you believe to be a troll.
If you wish to be taken seriously, then you should address the fact (and it is true) that on the majority of LGBT issues, Democrats (with a few exceptions) tend to be better than Republicans. You’re not going to be taken seriously by anyone outside of your own group otherwise. And I don’t think that bringing up stuff from 15 or 20 years ago is going to be persuasive. Perhaps, you could find someway to do that.
What is your goal? Is it to provide a forum for a few Gay people who are quite conservative to parrot right wing talking points on non-Gay issues and insult the Gay mainstream? That’s your right. Do you think that’s going to be effective?
Perhaps you should consider representing the Conservative movement to the Gay community (and issuing peans to Samual Alito isn’t going to find much traction – exactly how did that relate to Gay rights – at least it wasn’t Scalia) as well as representing the Gay community to the Conservative Movement in a way that isn’t “hey those guys – we laugh at them too”. I don’t think you’re even trying to do the second. Which is a shame. If you aren’t willing to even mildly address Gay issues and obvious cases of ignorance (at best) within the GOP, then you don’t really have much credibility to criticize others for being partisan.
She is inarticulate and deeply flawed.
Next time she’ll use a Teleprompter.
As VtK pointed out, she didn’t start it. I don’t happen to agree with her but what she said certainly isn’t controversial.
Tom – You obviously haven’t read GayPatriot much. Pull your dress down, your ignorance is showing.
we wish to condemn Rep. Foxx’s assertion that Matt Shepard’s sexual orientation was not a motivation for his murder and call on her to restract that assertion
You wish to condemn someone for telling the truth. How typical of the left.
Matt Shepard left a bar with two tweakers in order to do drugs and have three-way sex with them. They murdered him for drug money. He should be a cautionary example against irresponsible behavior. But you guys make a martyr out of him, and then “condemn” anyone who dares tell the truth.
Unfortunately, it appears that Gaypatriot/GOProud! wishes to remain silent on the issue of Virginia Foxx’s assertion that Matt Shepard was not murdered because of his sexual orientation. Last chance to correct it Gaypatioters!
It would be a real shame if GOProud!/Gaypatriot was just as bad as Virgnia Foxx. What a missed opportunity.
And if you don’t speak to this, I don’t want to hear you whining because you don’t get called for comment on Gay issues. Because you were silent on a major Gay news story.
Unfortunately, it appears that Gaypatriot/GOProud! wishes to remain silent on the issue of Virginia Foxx’s assertion that Matt Shepard was not murdered because of his sexual orientation. Last chance to correct it Gaypatioters!
It would be a real shame if GOProud!/Gaypatriot was just as bad as Virgnia Foxx. What a missed opportunity.
And if you don’t speak to this, I don’t want to hear you whining because you don’t get called for comment on Gay issues. Because you were silent on a major Gay news story.
Is my dress like Barney Frank’s lisp. Is that why you obsess over him so much? And you do. Even on non-Gay issues.
It seems to me that members on the left side of the gay community are constantly having hissy fits ala Tom of Lazybrook.
What is interesting to me is the story of Matt Shepherd. Yes we heard about it in Australia. It was served up as a “gay bashing and murder”, yet from what I have read here Matt Shepherd was no angel. 🙂
Tom, I am a straight woman. I do not believe in gay marriage, just like Miss Perjean. However, I have no problem with the idea that homosexual men and women should have their relationships ratified in some way.
I am also a Christian woman (read Catholic) and I object quite strongly to the in your face behviour of some members of the gay community. It is my right to express my objection and when gay men and women bash others who are straight for expressing their opinion, they are as guilty as though who claim themselves to be Christians.
The one thing I do not believe in, and this has a lot to do with how I originally understood the Matt Shepherd case is the murder of someone because of sexual orientation, colour or religion.
What I see here is that Tom of Lazybrook is concerned with a single issue and that he might be in fact giving false information or rather a deceptive account of what actually took place. If Matt Shepherd was dealing drugs and he intended having three-way sex with the perpetrators of the crime, then (a) he acted in a very naive way where these two people were concerned; and (b) this is not the hate crime like I was led to believe here in Australia.
So I would suggest that Matt comes clean about his own politics and stop picking on those who express a conservative point of view.
What on earth would liberals do without their delusions of victimhood?
Barney Frank is about as corrupt as people come, and he wields great power. Forget everything else on his long, LONG laundry list of corruption, if nothing else, Barney Frank bears more responsibility than any other individual for the economic crisis that has wreaked economic devastation on billions of people around the world.,
The man belongs in prison for life, but instead, he is in congress where he continues to destroy lives and enslave people.
Thats one fantastic f*cking reason to obsess over that human filth.
filtered 🙁
What on earth would liberals do without their delusions of victimhood?
Do you mean, what if liberals quit whining, accepted reality, and took personal responsibility for making their own happiness? They’d be conservatives.
Tom-
There are no last chances in America. Case study: Helen Thomas.
I still don’t get why Virginia Foxx needs to be condemned for making an accurate statement, except that attacking people for speaking truth to power (Carrie Prejean, the Tea Party folk) seems to be the modus operandi of the left these days.