DrMyers’s Blog

May 12, 2009

He’s Just Doing His Thing!: Miss California Retains Her Crown

 

Carrie Prejean - Miss California USA

Carrie Prejean - Miss California USA

Contests typically draw controversy.  At the present moment, Al Franken and Norm Coleman are currently winding down a very closely run contest for the Minnesota Senate seat.  Some controversies can last for decades, while others can last for days.  There are even instances where the public will never be aware of the controversies surrounding some contests whose results are made public.  

 

The latest Controversy, was in part brought to an end today, but raises some very interesting questions, and could affect the progress related to the agenda of Human/Civil Rights Campaigns.  

Today in a Press Conference, Donald Trump (Owner of the Miss USA/Universe Contest) announced that regardless of the public comments made by Miss California and Miss USA Runner up, Carrie Prejean, that she would retain her crown.  This decision came not 24 hours after the administrators of the Miss California Contest “fired” Ms Prejean, due to “Violation of Contract”.

During the Miss USA Pageant, blogger Perez Hilton , who was described as “doing his thing” by Donald Trump, asked a question regarding her support of Gay Marriage.  She responded, predicated with her intent not to offend anyone,  that in “My America” marriage is defined between a man and a woman.  Today, she was encouraged to reiterate her belief, aligning herself with the current belief of the President and Secretary of State (who was also a Presidential Candidate).  Supported by Mr. Trump (who refused to answer questions regarding his own personal belief on the subject) , Ms Prejean proudly encouraged others to use her experience as inspiration when standing up for their beliefs, regardless of the negative backlash that might accompany it.

A very serious question must now be posed:  When does one’s opinion regarding the Definition of Marriage infringe on the obstruction of civil liberties?  And; will the denial of Same-Sex marriage be looked at in the same manner as we look at inter-racial marriage today (which is still looked upon negatively in certain parts of the country).

One must remember that it was a little over 40 years ago, that it was still illegal for interracial couples to be married.  Leon Brazile (who was a trial judge in the case) echoed the rhetoric of German Physician Johann Frierich Blumenbach who stated, “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”  The pivotal vote taken by the DC City Council to recognized such marriages, sparked the legislation that was seen before the Supreme Court, which in turn descended that, “Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

During the Press Conference, the President’s view of marriage was touted by both Mr. Trump and Ms Prejean.  Another important question must be posed:  Will President Obama support legislation to legalize Gay Marriage?  If he does not, does this make him as bigoted as those who did not support his candidacy because of his color?

Today, the celebrated “opinion” of Miss California, has placed the Human Rights Campaign in an awkward position.  They could use this decision to press the Gay Marriage Debate to the forefront to gain definite results, or they could regroup and reanalyze their stance on the subject, which could result in the whole subject to be dropped all together.  What do you think?

Perhaps a voice from the past could help shed light on this subject:

 

 

 

Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson

 

 

All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. 

~Thomas Jefferson

7 Comments »

  1. This was a very good article. It is a very tough issue in America now that is dividing many people. I believe there can be a happy medium if people can learn to be more accepting, while at at the same, not sacrificing their own beliefs.

    Comment by Kristopher Evans — May 12, 2009 @ 1:53 pm | Reply

  2. I don’t think HRC has to change its strategy at all. Didn’t you know – the Gay Storm is coming!

    It’s actually the far-right who are scaremongering. I’m not a law expert, but it seems the States is following Canada’s lead. Province after province legalized gay marriage – whether it was because of judicial rulings or legislative changes. The federal government had no choice but to ensure equality for all Canadians no matter where you live.

    It looks like the same is happening in the States. Unfortunately, your religious right is MUCH louder and the ugly culture war will continue for a while before the dust settles. I say pro-gay marriage advocates should simply stand their ground and rebutt the silly arguments out there as needed. Eventually, I think people will realize that gay marriage is NOT something you should spend a lot of energy debating when there are more important issues for your country and that two people getting married will have NO effect on other people’s lives. I have confidence that common sense and justice will prevail in time.

    And if not, you guys can always move to Canada! :-)

    Great blog, by the way!

    Comment by James in TO — May 12, 2009 @ 2:09 pm | Reply

  3. I dont agree with PreJean/Ms. Calif & I am sure shes not a bad person. I think she is misguided, angry, selfish and hurt & doesnt see good in all people.

    Yet.

    I dont ask for her approval, nor hers or anyone elses acceptance. What I do ask for is equality, protection and tolerance of all things different than “you”.

    I do not want to get “married” in a church that wont have me as an open member without question.

    “He who speakith my name shall enter the kingdom of heaven.”
    Or something like that.

    THAT is ALL thats required. PERIOD.
    Im not saying you have to be perfect or even BAD and then say “GOD”, right before dying.

    THE universal energy will NOT send my spirit or ashes to an alternate universe because I am different.

    To my knowledge;
    The government does not recognize, “marriages” in the Religious sense.
    It recognizes the paperwork, notarization and certification of that ceremony.

    To my knowledge, I could be wrong.
    Something WILL happen in the Supreme Court, if it finds that the government or its states are recognizing RELIGIOUS CEREMONIES, which is against the constitution and rights of others insomuchas it violates the seperation of church and state.

    The government WILL make legal the right to a marital and government recognizable ceremony. Call it Marriage or whatever you want.

    To MANY of US its simply wording and semantics.

    To the fanatics, consevatives, and zealots its simply fear, (False Expectations Appearing Real), the unknown and miseducation.

    I like many others DO NOT WANT to get “married” in a church that doesnt want us there.
    There are plenty of beautiful places to hold a ceremony for marital ceremonies.
    Its as much a sacred day to the churchgoers, christians, muslims, jews etc.,
    As it is to us.

    There are more than enough countries where marriage equality is legal, including several states in the US.

    Oh yeah and I forgot to mention.
    We have more to gain and the other side has alot less to lose.
    Some of us will die for this right.
    Mark my words, if it comes down to it, some will kill and some will die and have died for it, some wont.

    I will as well, if it means saving people from the heartache and pain that I had to endure as a child, teen, and now an adult.
    This is something that the opponents will not do.

    Its ours to lose and to gain.
    Its not that important to them to die for.

    YET its our freedom of choice that is being denied.

    PS: Until the UNITED STATES recognizes some form of marital equality amongst 2 consenting adults, gay and straight, I encourage all persons having anything to do with any business within the realms of marriage events planning, catering, decorating, dressmaking, etc…To simply deny, based on personal and religious beliefs, all heterosexual marriage requests until it is made legal.

    PPS:
    Its not an “AGENDA’, its simply equality.

    Comment by @TCAGENT — May 12, 2009 @ 2:31 pm | Reply

  4. Thank you for stopping by and leaving a comment on my blog. I have blog rolled you. Feel free to do the same. I beloeve we share the same desire for a better America and equality for all. We worked very hard on CNN ireports, debating with the McCain bloggers. We did a good job keeping their reteric in check and verified. Their Anti-Obama reteric did not go un-challenged.

    We now have the 2010 elections coming up with over 88% of congressional seats open for re-election (435+ in the House and 36 in the Senate). You can find all of their Campaign contributors and voting history on my blog. Easy to follow Links provided. I hope everyone gets involved in this next election…not a good time to be an encumbant. They have some explaining to do. http://italco.wordpress.com/

    Comment by italco — May 12, 2009 @ 3:07 pm | Reply

  5. Excellent site, keep up the good work

    Comment by Bill Bartmann — September 3, 2009 @ 10:23 pm | Reply

  6. If this article isn’t biased i don’t know what is.

    And I quote.
    does this make him as bigoted as those who did not support his candidacy because of his color? (attacking ones character to make a point across is never a valid way of proving oneself.)

    Pretty much destroyed yourself right there, even though I support gay rights and have no opinion on gay marriage, this makes you no better or worse.

    Comment by Norway — November 25, 2009 @ 10:00 am | Reply

    • For those people, who did not support Barack Obama because of his race, then they are BIGOTS! And in 20 years will we consider Same Sex Marriage a “non-issue”, placing those who do not support it in that same category? I asked a Question…I didn’t make a statement.

      I’ve done everything but destroy myself…I have too much support…but if you were one of those people who did not support his candidacy because of his race…you sir are a bigot. And THAT is a statement.

      Thanks so much for reading,
      Aaron Myers

      Comment by drmyers — November 25, 2009 @ 10:49 am | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 68,545 other followers

%d bloggers like this: