Should Ms Cali have lost?

jlew24asu

know1 wrote:

I can. I don't oppose it or support it.

My opinion is that the government shouldn't sanction marriage at all.

How's that for walking the line?

but with marriage comes laws. marriage is much more then a religious activity. if it were that and only that, then yea, government should absolutely stay out of it. so to take that stance doesnt really make much sense.

my2hands

people actually give a shit about pageant's?

jlew24asu

my2hands wrote:

people actually give a shit about pageant's?

this debate isn't about pageants. its about gay marriage. the fact that this incident happened during a pageant is irrelevant.

decides2dream

justam wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

solely on her opinion of gay marriage?

http://omg.yahoo.com/news/perez-hilton- ... n/21528?nc

"The way miss California answered her question lost her the crown, without a doubt!" Perez told Access Hollywood after the pageant.

---

keep in mind, Perez was a judge.

I think it's wrong that she was penalized because she didn't give the answer the judges wanted. Shouldn't we all be entitled to our own opinions about things? Should she have been calculating and LIED instead?! How is that supposed to be better?! I don't know. But then again...

Perhaps it's the big picture that people are becoming aware that disapproval of gay marriage is a type of discrimination? Perhaps now it seems like everyone is supposed to approve of this because NOT approving it is viewed as withholding rights to people?!
I can kind of see both sides of this problem. :geek:

She obviously missed the class about "preparing answers to please others rather than expressing how you really feel to win pagents." :? :roll:

isn't that it tho?
it's not about your personal opinion, approval or disproval. she could've EASILY expressed her personal pov, AND said that she does however agree her personal beliefs should not infringe on the rights of others. no one is asking her to lie.....but if one wants to be miss usa or whatthefuckever, they should at the very least be able to see and appreciate the 'bigger picture'...and that includes your personal beliefs not infringing on the right of others.

jlew24asu wrote:

know1 wrote:

I can. I don't oppose it or support it.

My opinion is that the government shouldn't sanction marriage at all.

How's that for walking the line?

but with marriage comes laws. marriage is much more then a religious activity. if it were that and only that, then yea, government should absolutely stay out of it. so to take that stance doesnt really make much sense.

exactly.


and since marriage IS sanctioned by the government, whether you agree with it or not - it's not 'walking the line' by just saying you don't believe the govt should be involved. they ARE. until they are not, it's best to form an opinion on the topic so one can vote for/against what they believe is best for the country and it's citizens.



personally i LIKE 'legal marriage'....b/c such affords couples a very easy way to declare themselves legally together, with all the rights and responsibilities of it.

jlew24asu

decides2dream wrote:

isn't that it tho?
it's not about your personal opinion, approval or disproval. she could've EASILY expressed her personal pov, AND said that she does however agree her personal beliefs should not infringe on the rights of others. no one is asking her to lie.....but if one wants to be miss usa or whatthefuckever, they should at the very least be able to see and appreciate the 'bigger picture'...and that includes your personal beliefs not infringing on the right of others.

sounds like you are basically saying she needs support gay marriage in order to win this pageant. no?

decides2dream

jlew24asu wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

isn't that it tho?
it's not about your personal opinion, approval or disproval. she could've EASILY expressed her personal pov, AND said that she does however agree her personal beliefs should not infringe on the rights of others. no one is asking her to lie.....but if one wants to be miss usa or whatthefuckever, they should at the very least be able to see and appreciate the 'bigger picture'...and that includes your personal beliefs not infringing on the right of others.

sounds like you are basically saying she needs support gay marriage in order to win this pageant. no?

i think to answer the question 'correctly'........yes. i think EVERYone should support gay marriage, even if they personally are against it. i can easily say something is not right for me, but agree it is right for others to choose for themselves. it's a civil rights issue, plain and simple.


however, she did not need to answer this one question one particular way to win the pageant, she needed to do a WHOLE lotta other stupid shit to do that. as i don't watch pageants, i have no idea if she did or did not do all those other things 'right' either.....and that's why i don't judge beauty pageants.


anyhoo....her answer was moronic and incorrect, even without her personal pov. as i posted earlier, if indeed this one question 'cost' her, it may well be b/c she doesn't even know that gay marriage is NOT legal in all 50 states. her answer was terrible.

jlew24asu

decides2dream wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

isn't that it tho?
it's not about your personal opinion, approval or disproval. she could've EASILY expressed her personal pov, AND said that she does however agree her personal beliefs should not infringe on the rights of others. no one is asking her to lie.....but if one wants to be miss usa or whatthefuckever, they should at the very least be able to see and appreciate the 'bigger picture'...and that includes your personal beliefs not infringing on the right of others.

sounds like you are basically saying she needs support gay marriage in order to win this pageant. no?

i think to answer the question 'correctly'........yes. i think EVERYone should support gay marriage, even if they personally are against it. i can easily say something is not right for me, but agree it is right for others to choose for themselves. it's a civil rights issue, plain and simple.

but (I'm assuming) she doesnt support gay marriage. so its of your opinion, based on that stance, that she should not win. personally, I dont think thats fair.

know1

decides2dream wrote:

justam wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

solely on her opinion of gay marriage?

http://omg.yahoo.com/news/perez-hilton- ... n/21528?nc

"The way miss California answered her question lost her the crown, without a doubt!" Perez told Access Hollywood after the pageant.

---

keep in mind, Perez was a judge.

I think it's wrong that she was penalized because she didn't give the answer the judges wanted. Shouldn't we all be entitled to our own opinions about things? Should she have been calculating and LIED instead?! How is that supposed to be better?! I don't know. But then again...

Perhaps it's the big picture that people are becoming aware that disapproval of gay marriage is a type of discrimination? Perhaps now it seems like everyone is supposed to approve of this because NOT approving it is viewed as withholding rights to people?!
I can kind of see both sides of this problem. :geek:

She obviously missed the class about "preparing answers to please others rather than expressing how you really feel to win pagents." :? :roll:

isn't that it tho?
it's not about your personal opinion, approval or disproval. she could've EASILY expressed her personal pov, AND said that she does however agree her personal beliefs should not infringe on the rights of others. no one is asking her to lie.....but if one wants to be miss usa or whatthefuckever, they should at the very least be able to see and appreciate the 'bigger picture'...and that includes your personal beliefs not infringing on the right of others.

jlew24asu wrote:

know1 wrote:

I can. I don't oppose it or support it.

My opinion is that the government shouldn't sanction marriage at all.

How's that for walking the line?

but with marriage comes laws. marriage is much more then a religious activity. if it were that and only that, then yea, government should absolutely stay out of it. so to take that stance doesnt really make much sense.

exactly.


and since marriage IS sanctioned by the government, whether you agree with it or not - it's not 'walking the line' by just saying you don't believe the govt should be involved. they ARE. until they are not, it's best to form an opinion on the topic so one can vote for/against what they believe is best for the country and it's citizens.



personally i LIKE 'legal marriage'....b/c such affords couples a very easy way to declare themselves legally together, with all the rights and responsibilities of it.

I think you should just be able to designate the rights currently afforded to married couples to any other adult that you want. Following that, let people call themselves married or not. What would it matter?

(but even thought that really does solve the issue, you start to see the backpedaling begin)

justam

decides2dream wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

isn't that it tho?
it's not about your personal opinion, approval or disproval. she could've EASILY expressed her personal pov, AND said that she does however agree her personal beliefs should not infringe on the rights of others. no one is asking her to lie.....but if one wants to be miss usa or whatthefuckever, they should at the very least be able to see and appreciate the 'bigger picture'...and that includes your personal beliefs not infringing on the right of others.

sounds like you are basically saying she needs support gay marriage in order to win this pageant. no?

i think to answer the question 'correctly'........yes. i think EVERYone should support gay marriage, even if they personally are against it. i can easily say something is not right for me, but agree it is right for others to choose for themselves. it's a civil rights issue, plain and simple.


however, she did not need to answer this one question one particular way to win the pageant, she needed to do a WHOLE lotta other stupid shit to do that. as i don't watch pageants, i have no idea if she did or did not do all those other things 'right' either.....and that's why i don't judge beauty pageants.


anyhoo....her answer was moronic and incorrect, even without her personal pov. as i posted earlier, if indeed this one question 'cost' her, it may well be b/c she doesn't even know that gay marriage is NOT legal in all 50 states. her answer was terrible.

I think it may take some time for the train carrying equal rights for homosexual couples to get to every town though. And even when it arrives at the station, like this incident, people may not want to accept the delivery!

I think it takes a while for abstract ideas to sink into American culture.

decides2dream

decides2dream wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

decides2dream wrote:

i think to answer the question 'correctly'........yes. i think EVERYone should support gay marriage, even if they personally are against it. i can easily say something is not right for me, but agree it is right for others to choose for themselves. it's a civil rights issue, plain and simple.

but (I'm assuming) she doesnt support gay marriage. so its of your opinion, based on that stance, that she should not win. personally, I dont think thats fair.

i didn't say that.
i said to answer the question 'correctly'...nothing about winning or losing the pageant necessarily. however, even for the pageant....as i said....since this miss whatever is to represent 'USA' she should represent the country, and that means representing it's constitution and all. even tho it may not be legal everywhere...yet....it SHOULD be. just like 'seperate but equal' was never right either. point is, i don't think ANYone would win or lose based on one question, alone....it's the whole enchilada. just b/c one judge says it cost her the pageant, doesn't make it so.





justam...i hear ya......but every step in the right direction is a good one.

know1 wrote:

I think you should just be able to designate the rights currently afforded to married couples to any other adult that you want. Following that, let people call themselves married or not. What would it matter?

why does it apparently matter now? b/c apparently it DOES matter to some, if it didn't homosexuals would have these rights right now, in every state.

Wilds

jlew24asu wrote:

but (I'm assuming) she doesnt support gay marriage. so its of your opinion, based on that stance, that she should not win. personally, I dont think thats fair.

Well I'll be honest. I think that alone should stop her from winning.

To me it is the same as if she said Women are great, but they shouldn't be allowed to vote, or if she said I'm cool with slavery.

I don't think someone who openly tramples on the Constitution should be awarded some bullshit crown.

Drowned Out

I was under the impression that her response made her sound like a complete airhead, and would have lost her the competition regardless of her opinion. Opposite marriage

jlew24asu

decides2dream wrote:

i didn't say that.
i said to answer the question 'correctly'...nothing about winning or losing the pageant necessarily. however, even for the pageant....as i said....since this miss whatever is to represent 'USA' she should represent the country, and that means representing it's constitution and all. even tho it may not be legal everywhere...yet....it SHOULD be. just like 'seperate but equal' was never right either.

but it only SHOULD be according to you (and others of course). many firmly believe it should NOT be. there isn't a "correct" answer. at least not yet anyway. actually, the correct answer would technically be NO since its not legal for gays to marry.

you are saying she didnt correctly* answer the question and thus should not have won.

* = gay marriage should be allowed.

her opinion should not have cost her the crown.

decides2dream wrote:

point is, i don't think ANYone would win or lose based on one question, alone....it's the whole enchilada. just b/c one judge says it cost her the pageant, doesn't make it so.

but it is so. thats what the JUDGE said. who know, the person who decides who wins

jlew24asu

Wilds wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

but (I'm assuming) she doesnt support gay marriage. so its of your opinion, based on that stance, that she should not win. personally, I dont think thats fair.

Well I'll be honest. I think that alone should stop her from winning.

To me it is the same as if she said Women are great, but they shouldn't be allowed to vote, or if she said I'm cool with slavery.

I don't think someone who openly tramples on the Constitution should be awarded some bullshit crown.

but women are allowed to vote and slavery is illegal. of course she shouldnt win if she was in favor of those things.

fact is, gay marriage is not legal (yet). she was simply stating she personally believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. like it or not, thats how the law reads.

decides2dream

Wilds wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

but (I'm assuming) she doesnt support gay marriage. so its of your opinion, based on that stance, that she should not win. personally, I dont think thats fair.

Well I'll be honest. I think that alone should stop her from winning.

To me it is the same as if she said Women are great, but they shouldn't be allowed to vote, or if she said I'm cool with slavery.

I don't think someone who openly tramples on the Constitution should be awarded some bullshit crown.

wow, i retract my answer....while i was thinking similarly with the constitution idea, and even racially.....but i didn't take it quite all the way there. you did. you're right! it SHOULD cost her the crown. hahahaha, damn a crown........it costs us all a whole lot more to live amongst inequality.





jlew....isn't there more than one judge?
and that's how the law reads in SOME states...and just b/c it may be illegal everywhere else, doesn't make it right. it WAS illegal at one time for women to vote, for black to vote, etc, etc...so yes...if you want to be representative of your country, of it's ideals....that should include the constitution, so legal or not....that should mean, supporting equality for all. obviously, we see it differently, so be it. it's a BS pageant, but i can say i am glad she lost. besides which, according to HER idiotic answer, it IS legal in this country.....she's just against it, no offense. :roll: whatever..........

oh and for the last time, i said she didn't answer ONE question 'correctly' and that it, alone, should not cost her...it's the SUM of her answers. so please get your story straight. it is annoying when people make wrong conclusions about your opinion. altho now, i will say....i DO agree that one answer she cost her, but earlier..i wasn't in our exchange.

Wilds

jlew24asu wrote:

Wilds wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

but (I'm assuming) she doesnt support gay marriage. so its of your opinion, based on that stance, that she should not win. personally, I dont think thats fair.

Well I'll be honest. I think that alone should stop her from winning.

To me it is the same as if she said Women are great, but they shouldn't be allowed to vote, or if she said I'm cool with slavery.

I don't think someone who openly tramples on the Constitution should be awarded some bullshit crown.

but women are allowed to vote and slavery is illegal. of course she shouldnt win if she was in favor of those things.

fact is, gay marriage is not legal (yet). she was simply stating she personally believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. like it or not, thats how the law reads.

That is fine. But the year before woman were given the right to vote, and the year before Slavery was Abolished, if I was the judge in those years and a woman supported those two opinions at that time, then I would not give her the crown either.

Some things are bigger than antiquated laws. IMO.

decides2dream

Wilds wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

Wilds wrote:

Well I'll be honest. I think that alone should stop her from winning.

To me it is the same as if she said Women are great, but they shouldn't be allowed to vote, or if she said I'm cool with slavery.

I don't think someone who openly tramples on the Constitution should be awarded some bullshit crown.

but women are allowed to vote and slavery is illegal. of course she shouldnt win if she was in favor of those things.

fact is, gay marriage is not legal (yet). she was simply stating she personally believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. like it or not, thats how the law reads.

That is fine. But the year before woman were given the right to vote, and the year before Slavery was Abolished, if I was the judge in those years and a woman supported those two opinions at that time, then I would not give her the crown either.

Some things are bigger than antiquated laws. IMO.

great, and succinct, posts!
really well stated.....far better than me.....and yes, seeing it fully in the big picture, i agree!

jlew24asu

ok, lets pretend that question wasnt asked and the other girl lost based on her answer of bailouts. she was asked if companies should get bailouts. lets pretend she said yes. people are very passionate about that issue too and are almost as split like gay marriage debate.. should she have lost because the judge didnt like her opinion on that?

you people only think she should have lost because you happen to disagree with her. hell I do too but she shouldnt lose a based on that one belief.

decides2dream

jlew24asu wrote:

ok, lets pretend that question wasnt asked and the other girl lost based on her answer of bailouts. she was asked if companies should get bailouts. lets pretend she said yes. people are very passionate about that issue too and are almost as split like gay marriage debate.. should she have lost because the judge didnt like her opinion on that?

you people only think she should have lost because you happen to disagree with her. hell I do too but she shouldnt lose a based on that one belief.

no.
opinion is not a fact. the bailouts are most definitely an 'opinion' topic...whereas imo, gay marriage is not. again, it's a civil rights issue, plain and simple...and there is only one right answer there, and that answer isn't just based on your personal opinion but on the constitution.





oh, and i will point out one more time - she simply gave an idiotic answer, sans her opinion! it was not well-educated, at all! she currently thinks it IS legal in all states...so for that idiocy alone she should lose the crown! :P

jlew24asu

decides2dream wrote:

jlew24asu wrote:

ok, lets pretend that question wasnt asked and the other girl lost based on her answer of bailouts. she was asked if companies should get bailouts. lets pretend she said yes. people are very passionate about that issue too and are almost as split like gay marriage debate.. should she have lost because the judge didnt like her opinion on that?

you people only think she should have lost because you happen to disagree with her. hell I do too but she shouldnt lose a based on that one belief.

no.
opinion is not a fact. the bailouts are most definitely an 'opinion' topic...whereas imo, gay marriage is not. again, it's a civil rights issue, plain and simple...and there is only one right answer there, and that answer isn't just based on your personal opinion but on the constitution.

LOL if it were only that simple. apparently there is more then one right answer. take CA for example, they voted against it. to Californians the right answer is NO gay marriage.

decides2dream wrote:

oh, and i will point out one more time - she simply gave an idiotic answer, sans her opinion! it was not well-educated, at all! she currently thinks it IS legal in all states...so for that idiocy alone she should lose the crown! :P

I know, but for the sake of argument, lets assume it was intelligent. I'll cut em all a little slack, she was nervous and stumbled a bit. she was asked, arguably, the most controversial topic in front of millions of people. not the easiest thing to do.