The following column is by Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action. Barber also co-hosts the nationally syndicated “Liberty Live” talk radio program on AFR Talk. Brackets and ellipsis below indicate an editorial effort to keep Pro-Existence a family-friendly source of comment and analysis, an increasingly challenging proposition, given the rise of anti-family forces of secuarism and intolerance in the land, exemplified of late by a judge with the Miss USA pageant.
You may have heard. During Sunday’s Miss USA pageant openly “gay” activist and pageant judge Perez Hilton -- the self-styled “Queen of Media” -- ambushed Carrie Prejean -- the openly Christian Miss California -- with a politically loaded question on so-called “same-sex marriage.” Prejean’s candid answer -- as both Hilton and Miss USA organizer Donald Trump later admitted -- likely cost her the crown.
From the moment she opened her mouth, Prejean has given liberals a clinic in class. Hilton, on the other hand (a.k.a. Mario Armando Lavandeira), has provided the world a sneak peek into the soul of homosexual activism.
This is one for the up-is-down-black-is-white hall of fame. The media’s fabricated flap over Prejean’s answer -- a public defense of legitimate marriage -- has a reasonable America scratching its collective noggin in stunned disbelief. Not because of the answer she gave Perez -- which was both well received by the pageant audience and overwhelmingly shared by about 70% of Americans -- but, rather, because of Hilton’s hate-filled, misogynistic response to her answer and the disgraceful, knee-jerk defense of that response by liberals in Hollywood, the media, and organized homosexuality.
After Hilton asked the lovely and talented Miss California whether “every state” should legalize “same-sex marriage,” Prejean responded: “In my country, in my family . . . 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 it should be -- between a man and a woman.”
Oh the humanity!
Evidently this was not the rooty-tooty-fresh-n’-fruity answer Hilton -- the creepy valley girl wannabe with a five o’clock shadow -- had hoped for. He promptly marked Prejean’s score card with a zero, plopped down in front of the television cameras and began blubbering away like a fussy little snot with a dirty diaper.
Having already publicly called Prejean a “dumb b----,” he then yammered to a sympathetic Norah O’Donnell on MSNBC that not only was he refusing to apologize he was actually “thinking the C-word.” This, of course, one of the vilest things anyone can call a woman. Yet, rather than taking Hilton to task for the boy lover’s girl-hating poison, O’Donnell joined in on the bash-fest, criticizing Prejean for her traditional view.
But Hilton wasn’t done yet. Ramping up his vicious attack on the Christian California bombshell, our lispy-wispy lil’ cupcake dove headlong into the annals of dirt-baggery lore. He defaced a photo of Prejean on his weblog scribbling . . . a crude depiction of [male anatomy].
How did Prejean react?
While talking to Matt Lauer on NBC’s Today Show she said, “I knew at that moment after I answered the question, I knew, I was not going to win because of my answer, because I had spoken from my heart, from my beliefs and for my God. . . . I wouldn't have answered it differently. The way I answered may have been offensive. With that question specifically, it's not about being politically correct. For me it was being biblically correct.”
On the Fox News Channel’s Hannity program, Prejean shared, “You know, I forgive him. I know that he's angry for whatever reason. I know there must be a bigger issue going on in his life.”
Like I said -- Class.
Still, Perez Hilton -- Hollywood’s frothy-potty-mouthed little drama queen -- isn’t alone in his hatred for Prejean or the three-fourths of Americans who share her opposition to the novel and incongruous concept of “gay marriage.”
For example, Wayne Besen, a prominent leader in the homosexual activist community, unbelievably went on Fox News’ O’Reilly Factor to defend Hilton. He picked up Hilton’s anti-Christian torch, incredibly charging that it was Prejean, not Hilton, whose millennia-old recognition of biblical marriage “was divisive.” Besen then added insult to injury and revealed his true rainbow colors by tagging the 70% of Americans who oppose “gay marriage” as “bigots.”
This whole hateful affair provides the perfect metaphor for the current divide between defenders of traditional sexual morality and the extremist “queer” activist movement. As Congress debates the constructive repeal of both the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of “equal protection under the law” and the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and freedom of religion through passage of discriminatory and wholly unnecessary “hate crimes” legislation, this little episode once again reminds us that the self-described champions of “tolerance” and “diversity” are the most intolerant and hateful among us.
How soon we forget. Just hearken back a few months to the passage of California’s Proposition 8, which restored the definition of natural marriage to the Golden State. There we all played witness to “gay” activist calls for church burnings, Mormon Temple vandalism, death threats against Prop 8 supporters and quasi-riotous assaults against peaceful Christian marriage supporters.
So, insofar as liberals continue to dig their own hole by defending Hilton and piling on Prejean, I submit they’re doing the other 70% of us a favor. In their biting anger, they’ve cast aside the sublime mask of “tolerance,” revealing an ugly, desperate and most intolerant countenance below.
For that, I say thank you. For your treatment of Carrie Prejean, I say shame on you.
Related:
Beauty and the Beast: Resisting the Reactionary Extremism of Perez Hilton
Miss California: "God Was Testing My Faith"
Open Lesbian, CNN Anchor, Defends Miss America Judge
Anderson Cooper and the Crisis of Journalism
From 
11 comments:
Thanks for your conviction and for speaking it. Businesses and companies will have to learn the hard way that they cannot trample traditional mores, morals and family and expect no consequences of diminished business.
April 4, 2008 7:51:00 PM EDTWhat is next? A "Macgay" burger? I shudder to think how the rabid homosexual agenda will continue to influence week kneed MacDonald executives who fail to understand some basic fundamentals of the culture. As Ben Franklin once stated: "Experience keeps a dear school, but a fool will learn in no other."
Thanks for posting this info. It shocks the intellect to see such corporate behavior, but, then again, I'm not that surprised when postmodern minds (including the executive boards they occupy) act according to their nature. Corporations who misguidedly and even passionately support the gay agenda generally see such activity as being that of a "good citizen," which they then translate to being "good business." They refreshingly aid all mankind (pardon the sexism) in reaching the pluralistic shores of tolerance and equality.
April 4, 2008 11:06:00 PM EDTHowever, in God's economy, such reasoning is futile.
See you at Chick-Fil-A.
One small step for common decency.
April 4, 2008 11:59:00 PM EDTOne giant step for civilization.
The Big Mac's price
is not worth perversion.
Spread the word.
Mr. Pearcey:
April 5, 2008 1:18:00 AM EDTThank God: you and your son will be healthier for it. McDonald's isn't exactly what's best for our bodies. (I am speaking as a former addict; my dad took me there every Saturday as a child. It was a hard habit to break!)
Parents, keep an eye on those Happy Meals: The homosexual agenda targets the youngest, most impressionable ones first...
Sincerely.
I am with you.
April 5, 2008 8:28:00 PM EDTGood for you. We decided to do the same. If McDonald's is going to support the homosexual agenda, they aren't going to do so with our money.
April 7, 2008 10:31:00 AM EDTIt always amazes me when corporations try to control and influence society like this. It didn't work out too well for Ford and it won't work out for McDonald's.
April 7, 2008 10:31:00 AM EDTWhat would Roy Kroc, founder, think?
April 7, 2008 4:19:00 PM EDTdig deep enough, and i think you're going to be growing all your own food and avoiding all packaged goods.
April 7, 2008 11:21:00 PM EDTsuch is life under capitalism, the profit motive by definition is amoral. my guess is that mcdonald's probably is looking more at numbers than making a dramatic social statement...
i love chick fil a
April 8, 2008 4:22:00 AM EDTAhem!
October 11, 2008 8:45:00 PM EDTIt's not just Mcdonalds.
I was very concerned when I heard that Google was contributing large sums of money to the homosexual marriage agenda.
I applauded Google on their stance over China. I left Yahoo because of their lack of concern for Chinese freedom on the internet. I love Gmail and have a blog on Blogger. :-(
I remember a time quite a few years ago when I had to go without buying onions for a few weeks because the only ones in the shops near me were from South Africa or Chile.
I stopped buying McDonalds a few years ago when I learned they buy up the diseased animals left at the end of trading at the markets and put MSG in their food. (MSG is an excitotoxin which kills brain cells and is an addictive substance.) - Chick-Fil-A also use MSG. They have to otherwise the caged bird-flesh they use would be tasteless.