Carrie Prejean's Gay Marriage Controversy

[Gman]

Not that I endorse beauty pageants that paint women as sex objects, I commend Carrie Prejean's comment on the gay marriage controversy. That took a lot courage to stand up there and take the heat. She will now forever be labeled as a hate monger and will probably have her career trashed.. It's too bad. She was the real winner in my opinion...

[zoegirl]

Yup, a bit hypocritical to laud honesty and other virtues in the "winner" and then criticize an honest answer, especially condiering some of the PC vapid responses usually given. You could see that she struggled briefly thinking about what type of an answer to give....it took courage to give one so un-PC

And who in their right mind think Perez HIlton is a good judge anyway....what a yutz.

[Harry12345]

Congrats to the brave contestant who stood up for her beliefs. Need more people like her in the world.

This is what the Miss USA co-director said on the issue:
"She lost the crown because she wasn't able to convey compassion for ALL the people that as MISS USA she would be representing. And if you like it or not, gays and lesbians make up this country as well. THIS is why we have judges so they can find the RIGHT woman who obtains these qualities…The panel of judges was qualified and did their job, they represented all of us, men, woman, black, white, gay and straight."

Now this is what Carrie Prejean actually said:
"Well I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. Um, we live in a land that you can choose same sex marriage or opposite marriage and, you know what, in my country and in, 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 that it should be between a man and a woman."

WHAT part of that is offensive or intolerant??? Gobsmacked!

[rodyshusband]

In today's culture, if you don't fully agree with someone and accept what they say as true without question, you are labeled "intolerant".

Interestingly enough, I know there are those in the gay lifestyle who are opposed to same-sex marriage. They, of course, are not "intolerant".

[ageofknowledge]

First, individuals who choose to, or sex addicts who, repeatedly engage in homosexual practices have every right that non-homosexuals do to marry a member of the opposite sex of legal age if they are consenting and if neither is already married. Hetrosexuals and homosexuals all have exactly the same rights.

Second, Holy matrimony/marriage is a covenant relationship/union between a man and a woman that has divine sanction from the Lord Himself. Since homosexuality doesn't qualify, it would be an abomination for them to engage in Holy Matrimony.

[BavarianWheels]

it would be an abomination for them to engage in Holy Matrimony.

What about a legal marriage then?
.
.

[Harry12345]

it would be an abomination for them to engage in Holy Matrimony.

What about a legal marriage then?
.
.

Here we go...

[ageofknowledge]

It is an abomination for individuals who engage in homosexual practices to enter into a Scriptural marriage covenant relationship which God ordained for a man and a woman.

[BavarianWheels]

It is an abomination for individuals who engage in homosexual practices to enter into a Scriptural marriage covenant relationship which God ordained for a man and a woman.

What about two homosexuals that abstain from sexual relations but love each other enough to get married?

You still haven't answered: What about a secular marriage between non-believers/atheists/ungodly?
.
.

[ageofknowledge]

What about two homosexuals that abstain from sexual relations but love each other enough to get married?

There are no exceptions.

You still haven't answered: What about a secular marriage between non-believers/atheists/ungodly?

I haven't answered because it has nothing to do with my assertion.

[BavarianWheels]

What about two homosexuals that abstain from sexual relations but love each other enough to get married?

There are no exceptions.

You still haven't answered: What about a secular marriage between non-believers/atheists/ungodly?

I haven't answered because it has nothing to do with my assertion.

Ok...but are we living in a Theocracy or a Democracy? Is this society religious or secular...if religious, then I agree with your assertion(s). If secular, then I find your assertion(s) wrong.
.
.

[ageofknowledge]

We are living in a fallen world.

[BavarianWheels]

We are living in a fallen world.

Agreed. Democratic or Theocratic?
.
.

[Harry12345]

We are living in a fallen world.

Agreed. Democratic or Theocratic?
.
.

Either way, same-sex marriage cannot happen. Most people want marriage to be between one man and one woman. So democracy or theocracy, same-sex marriage is out of the question.

Unless of course, the issue gets taken to court...

[ageofknowledge]

Or Obama is able to get same-sex marriage in a McTreaty with some foreign country thereby passing the Congress, the Supreme Court, and taking liberties with the Constitution's treaty provision. He's trying to use a McTreaty with Mexico right now to force gun registration on every gun owner in the nation and also to place them under foreign law to an extent. Next up getting all that United Nation's blasphemy law and hate speech law forced on the citizens of our country. If he has his way, eventually our government will just be a proxy for the United Nations and foreign countries and we'll all live under oppression.