The gay marriage controversy was again brought to the forefront on Sunday night in an unlikely way when celebrity judge Perez Hilton asked a contestant in the Miss USA pageant whether or not same-sex marriage should be legalized across America.
Miss California, Carrie Prejean, answered the question by stating her belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Despite the fact that Prejean’s home state of California passed a statewide ballot initiative in November defining marriage as being between a man and a woman and that our current president and vice president disapprove of gay marriage, her candid answer to an emotionally charged question has provoked extensive debate in the media since the contest aired Sunday night. Both Prejean and Donald Trump, who owns the pageant, later remarked that her answer may have cost her the pageant title.
Perhaps the most outspoken voice in the debate over Prejean’s answer has been the judge who asked her the question, openly gay celebrity gossip columnist Hilton. Shortly after the pageant ended, Hilton broadcast a message on his Web site in which he referred to Prejean as a “dumb bitch.”
In the days since the pageant, Hilton has appeared on CBS, MSNBC, and Larry King Live to defend his point of view, and in an interview with Matt Lauer, Hilton stated “I would have appreciated it had she left her politics and her religion out, because Miss USA represents all Americans.”
So Hilton asks a question in front of a national television audience about whether or not gay marriage should be legalized and expects the contestant to put aside her political and religious beliefs? Is it even possible to put aside one’s politics in response to a question about whether something should be legalized in America? Is that not an inherently political question?
If Hilton was so hell-bent on asking such a socially, religiously, and politically divisive question at a beauty pageant, then he should have been better prepared to entertain an alternative point of view.
Obviously, Hilton isn’t the spokesperson for the homosexual agenda in America, and I would imagine that any sensible gay rights activist would prefer for Hilton to go back to his gossip Web site where, among other things, he draws phallic symbols on various celebrities’ pictures.
Unfortunately, the disdain shown by Hilton towards Prejean is nothing new. The left wing in America, which so frequently and persistently supports the concept of tolerance for its agenda, is all too hesitant to reciprocate such tolerance towards opposing viewpoints.
In the wake of the passage of Proposition 8 in California last November, many of those who financially supported the measure came under fire from gay rights groups in California simply because their political views were not aligned with the far-left agenda in the state.
Scott Eckern was the artistic director at the California Musical Theatre in Sacramento and donated $1,000 to support Prop 8. After the bill was passed, gay advocacy groups began targeting individuals who had made donations to the measure and a boycott was organized at Eckern’s theatre. Several days later, Eckern resigned from his position.
Similarly, Richard Raddon, the former director of the Los Angeles Film Festival, was singled out for contributing $1,500 to the Proposition 8 effort. After a boycott was planned against the festival, Raddon resigned as well. The Wall Street Journal reported that everyone from dentists to restaurant owners across the state of California have faced similar backlashes as a result of their financial support for Proposition 8.
If the narrow passage of Proposition 8 in California has taught us anything, it’s that the same people who so vigorously espouse tolerance in public are ruthless when it comes to advancing their far-left agenda behind the scenes. It may be illegal for employers to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, but if you support traditional marriage in California, you might want to make sure your retirement funds are in place.
Hilton’s feigned outrage over Miss California’s answer is indicative of a far greater problem in America today. For far too long, the left wing has gotten away with promoting the superficial concept of tolerance while simultaneously labeling those who disagree with its agenda as racists, bigots, and religious radicals.
It’s time for those on the left (and especially in California) to start practicing what they preach and put an end to this hypocritical and inconsistent position.
Joseph Goddard is a senior political science and economics double major. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].
