You have totally ignored everything I wrote so I will keep my reply short.

First, straight people DO try to destroy me just because I’m a lesbian. Carrie Prejean is the spokesperson for one of the organizations that IS trying to destroy homosexuals. Second-class citizenship kills.

Second, I am not trying to destroy Carrie Prejean. Carrie Prejean is in the process of destroying herself.

Third, the only thing Carrie Prejean believes in is saying and doing whatever she thinks will get her money, power and status. Champion sociopaths like that at your peril.

Fourth: “Who has made you the moral policeman for everyone else?” Really? You have no insight whatsoever into how funny that sentence is in its context? You have no insight into Prejean and NOM setting themselves up as moral police? Sentences like that just scream, “concern troll.”

Fifth: It is NOM and its allies who are the totalitarians. Re-read my post and United in Hate by Jamie Glazov.

Sixth: It is sociopathic to state that you have no requirement to do the right thing toward people who annoy you — in this case, the gay community, because a number of us are not taking the outrage of church-imposed second-class citizenship submissively enough for your taste. Not everyone is polite about being murdered by the death of a thousand cuts. But to state that you will only do right by people who please you is sociopathic. Hmmmm. I wonder if that type of behavior reflects badly on the entire straight community. Why, now that I think about — yes, yes, it does.

Cynthia

Although I’m straight, my best friend in college was gay. When he came out, I wanted to keep up the friendship, and we did for awhile. However, as he became more involved in the gay community, he moved out of my life. Because of comments he made, I discovered that many people in the gay community are prejudiced against straight people. My friend eventually told me he was moving to Brazil, and disappeared. I think about him often, but have no way to find out what has happened to him since he hasn’t keep in touch. His father is now dead and his mother has moved. I have heard rumors that he is dead, but I have no way to confirm it.

In reading your blog, it appears that you and, unfortunately, many other gay people, intend to do everything you can to destroy a woman because she disagrees with you about the definition of marriage. Imagine how you would feel if straight people tried to destroy you because you are gay. How would you feel about it? So what if the woman made some racy movies? What is wrong with that? Who has made you the moral policeman for everyone else? If you want to be respected despite your minority sex practices, why can’t you respect her for hers. And please, don’t talk about hypocrisy.

My definition of conservatism is classical liberalism. That means that you and I should respect each other’s freedom to believe differently than us so long as their beliefs do not include inciting violence against other people. In my opinion, the successful attempt by the gay community to destroy another human being because of her honestly held belief is extremely ugly. It is more fitting of a totalitarian state than of a free democracy. This type of behavior reflects badly on the entire gay community.

You’re welcome! And thank you, too!

Cynthia

First, I am not painting or spinning Prejean as an intolerant bigot. I never frame the arguments for homosexual equality in terms of either tolerance or bigotry.

Second, I am horrified by the utter lack of principles, morals and ethics of people who say that they will only do the right thing toward other people if those other people humble themselves to their satisfaction. When you DO have principles, ethics and morals, you do right, period. Doing right is based on who YOU are, NOT on who others are.

Third, I covered Prejean’s press conference last May and got the measure of her character. Since then, what I have written repeatedly is that she does not have any principles AT ALL. She says and does things ONLY to serve her own interests. I included the news report about her mother’s lesbianism to show that she is lying about being raised to oppose homosexual marriage equality AND to show that she sold out HER OWN MOTHER for personal gain AND for no reason since she could just as easily have championed her mother’s equality and made as much or more money by doing so.

Fourth, what has been sold as timeless “traditional values” is totally bogus since marriage has traditionally been about women and children as property AND has constantly evolved. The coalition of churches — Catholic, Mormon and evangelical Christian — that will spare no expense and tell any lie to prevent homosexuals from achieving equal status as U.S. citizens is fighting for control of individual reproduction so they can cut off every possible sexual outlet that does not lead to more children to swell their numbers and their coffers — they may say they are fighting for traditional values, but what is really driving them is greed and lust for power.

Fifth, homosexuals briefly had marriage equality in California and the battle to take our equality away on the basis of the potential for our unions to produce children was shaping up at the time of the Miss USA pageant. So any Miss California was going to get asked about it and this made Perez’s question perfectly legitimate. Pageant participants do train to be able to answer controversial questions inoffensively — Prejean’s successor certainly mastered this skill. But Prejean chose to offend a minority based on her correct perception that she would be exalted as a heroine by their enemies and that they would not be in a position to defend themselves. Again, I believe ALL of Prejean’s actions at all times in every aspect of her life are motivated by her narcissism — the only thing she believes in and serves is her own self-interest. Also, I found her answer to Perez to be gleefully, joyfully nasty and offensive.

Last, beauty pageant contracts expressly require participants to disclose if there are any racy photos and/or tapes or movies in which they appear. Prejean signed the contracts for her Miss California and Miss USA pageants without disclosing the semi-nude photos or her masturbation tape. She lied. The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has been running her around the country as a model of morality and Christian values. So lying on her contracts and making masturbation videos demonstrate that her actions do not match her image. See points three and five regarding Prejean and the subject of marriage.

I really can’t follow your vegetarianism analogy.

The only change homosexuals are making in traditional values is choice of spouse. We WANT to make the same vows and shoulder the same duties that heterosexual couples do when they marry. The prospects of our unions for directly producing children from the two persons involved is an insufficient argument for relegating homosexuals to second-class citizenship and for violating our Constitutional right to separation of church and state — religions should not be allowed to hijack the apparatus of the state to impose their religious definition of marriage and force a minority into second-class citizenship.

Stinky, I do appreciate that you follow this blog and the courtesy with which you make your points.

Cynthia

Remember: Prejean did not volunteer her opinion; Perez Hilton deliberately bated her and put her in an awkward position. She chose not to lie, and gave her opinion in a measured, courteous, and respectful manner. She was vilified for this. So, because she’s allegedly on tape in the buff, being naughty, that makes her a hypocrite on the issue of marriage? If she had been asked if she was for vegetarianism, and she said, yes, because it is a more moral choice, and a sex tape was discovered, would that make her opinion on vegetarianism invalid? Perez Hilton did not ask her about vegetarianism, or sex tapes, or posing nude. He asked her about same sex marriage, and she answered as I noted above.

Traditional values HAVE VALUE. That is why they’ve been around so long. Your argument that our definition of marriage can change and evolve (made in previous posts) is well taken, but you win no friends to your cause by painting people like Prejean as intolerant bigots who deserve what is coming to them.