Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Probably not the definitive post on Miss California

But I had to say it:

If Perez Hilton, as judge, didn't want to hear an honest answer from a young contestant in a pageant with morality clauses in it, why did he ask her opinion? Is it really worth disqualification, for a young woman to actually proclaim that she has some grounding in morality? Seems to me, there's a morality clause in the contest rules. And, more certainly, for several decades, the contestants were expected to recite the creed: "We, the young women of the universe, believe people everywhere are seeking peace, tolerance and mutual understanding. We pledge to spread this message in every way we can, wherever we go."

She was honest. She didn't say she thought Hilton and his companion (if he has one, currently) should be hoist upon a cross or burn in the fires of hell for lusting after each other. She didn't cry out against homosexuality. She simply stated that, according to her faith and the laws across most of her country, marriage is defined as between a man and a woman. Seems pretty clear.

But Perez and others seem to think that, even when asked directly, expressing her honest opinion should cost her everything she worked for.


No comments: