20 comments on “The Price of Honesty

  1. Thank you for this post. I am glad there are some rising to defend Prejean to her right to have her own opinion and belief while also recognising the hypocrisy of those who raised the original question and those who have hounded her since.

  2. Hey Dre,
    Wow, twice in one week! The check is definately in the mail. I applaud you for your total LACK of hypocrisy. This is truly an assault on free speech, who’s going to dare say anything opposing the Gay advocates if this is the result? As we speak, I’m looking at the cover of US magazine (someone else’s, I assure you) and it has as one of it’s bullet lines “Miss California Implant Scandal”. Implants? In a beauty pagent? My God! There’s more silicone in your average beauty pagent than in all of Silicone Valley!! I should point out that even some of my gay friends think this is way over the line. Once again, Andre, you’ve shown yourself to be a clear enough thinker to see injustice even when it’s on the other side of what you personally believe. Kudos!

  3. I for one am not so easily moved by this post. I read that each contestant was required to sign a contract basically outlining their ethical and moral obligations outside of the contest. If showing revealing photos is apart of that agreement THEY SIGNED, the pageant committee is well within their rights to take action. You all remember what happened to Vanessa Williams, right? This would have been an issue whether or not she made her statements about gay marriage.

    Now, as it relates to the vast conspircy theory being tossed around: if memory serves me correctly, the question wasn’t about whether or not she agreed with gay marriage. The question focused on whether states should follow Vermont’s lead in overriding its governor’s veto on same-sex marriage. Nobody asked her to go into some rant…uh, I mean, “explanation” on why she didn’t believe in it. She was asked about what states should do in situations like that, not whether she thought it was right or wrong. She set herself up for this.

    • Mike,

      I didn’t watch the pageant. I never do. So I’ll leave the question/answer analysis up to you. But even if your point rings true, and the gay marriage opposition thing came up as a result of an indirect answer, I still don’t think that was cause enough to crucify her. Had she not offered a direct answer, but her response focused on liberal ideas, she would have been a hero on the left. Had she responded to the Vermont legislature story by saying “I don’t know about Vermont, but I hope they don’t do things like the President Bush. Now HE was a bad man!”, rest assured she would’ve been hired as a contributor for the Daily Kos the next day.

      The fact is simple: she said something the left didn’t like. They smeared her for it. She stands to lose her crown because of it. Open and shut case.

    • if memory serves me correctly, the question wasn’t about whether or not she agreed with gay marriage. The question focused on whether states should follow Vermont’s lead in overriding its governor’s veto on same-sex marriage.

      The question absolutely was whether or not she agreed with the nationwide legalization of gay marriage. The question, verbatim, was: “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize gay marriage. Do you think other states should follow suit? Why or why not?”

      If you don’t want an honest answer to a question like that, don’t ask it. It was no one’s business but her own in the first place. It’s not much different from asking about her sexual orientation in a public forum.

  4. Blahblahblah. With two wars going on & the economy in the crapper, why is this news?

    -n

    • This certainly doesn’t rank up there on my list of priorities (despite the length of this post). But this IS an issue that needs to be addressed.

  5. Truth be told, I could care less about either one of these clowns, Perez Hilton or Carrie Prejean. Anybody who even still follows this beauty pageant nonsense should have their heads examines.

    • Kenya,

      I think most people would agree with you. Not a single person I know cares about the contest itself. This story represents a much bigger issue: the punishment and consequences associated with freedom of speech.

      This issue may not be important now, but it might be when you get fired by your conservative boss if he finds out you read my leftist, Obama-supporting, conspiracy theorist blog.

  6. Good Job!
    When I heard the answer (which was fine to me) and then the comment, I thought wierd (about the comment), seriously I thought that there is a FREEDOM of SPEECH and BELIEFS, but it seems there is not.

    I know the rule saying: Keep your thoughts to yourself, but then it goes in contradiction with everything one believes.

    She was honest, she talked about herself, she didn’t say EVERYBODY! she said “In my family”.

    It’s good that somebody tries to defend her.

    • I know the rule saying: Keep your thoughts to yourself, but then it goes in contradiction with everything one believes.

      I agree. She would’ve been better served by not saying anything. But in a society that often encourages people to speak their minds, engage in conversation, etc., it’s very hypocritical for her to pay a hefty price for doing so. Instead of talking to her, challenging her ideas, or even being critical of her thoughts, they outright punished her…and then used a cheesy explanation to justify their moves. Sad day of affairs.

      Interesting blog you have, by the way. But do I really have to call you sugar daddy?

  7. In principal I agree with everything you posted, Dre. But if its true that she signed an contract about not doing things like posing semi-nude, but broke that contract, she deserves the punishment that comes along with it. Saying this was retribution for her anti-gay marriage comments COULD have some merit (I’m still willing to give the offiicals the benefit of the doubt). But Prejean put herself in this bind by breaking the rules in the first place.

    I read that she’s claiming that the pictures were taken before she competed. If THAT’s true, she should not have signed the contract in good conscious, in the event the pictures ever surfaced. At the very least, she should have told the committee about the photos in the event they were ever leaked (hindsight is 20/20, huh?).

    She can cry injustice all she wants, but she has proven to everybody what happens when you don’t take the high road.

    OK. Now that this is over and done with, let’s get to more important matters, shall we?

    • Miss KD,

      I concede to the point about following rules. But if she is truly being punished for breaking those rules, perhaps its time the contest reconsiders their guidelines. It is flagrantly hypocritical for an institution known for parading women to set moral standards on their behavior outside of the industry; especially when these women often seek opportunities that similarly rely on their appearance (modeling, for example). I hate to say this, lest I sound sexist, but many women do – in fact – use contests like these as a springboard to another career.

  8. Hey,

    This was a great post. I like many others don’t give a hoot about these beauty contests either. But, am a bit in the middle on the Carrie P. issue.

    I do agree that she is being persecuted for her statement of her beliefs. (The fact that people are still talking about this is evidence of how many have overreacted to her comments).

    and yet, I often think, about a parrallel though not completely identical situation. No one would ask such a question today but if her answer had been the same to a question on interracial marriage… she would have been vilified by everyone as a racist, no? Even if it was what she was raised in her family to believe.

    And so in that sense, it’s a question of how far can/does free speech go. We’ve accepted certain things are covered and yet certain things, that depending on how you look at it should not.

    All this to say, if it wasn’t a question about Gay marriage… an issue that there isn’t unanimous concensus or a concensus of plurality about, then she probably would not be encouraged by most people for what she said.

    btw, GDS is a good enough abbreviation, no?

    • @ GDS: I think you’re correct in that Prejean would have been excoriated more for opposition to interracial marriage than in the case of her voicing opposition to gay marriage. But at the same time, I think the two are wholly different.

      From a biological aspect at least, comparing skin color and sexual preferance is wrong to do, in my opinion. While I think homosexuality has a certain unmanufactured quality (i.e. I believe gay people have uncontrollable and perhaps innate behavioral tendencies), I still think the practice is socially and biologically viewed as a departure from normal body functions. Interracial partnerships don’t deviate from that same male/female biological norm.

  9. Hello Handsome
    Hope all is well on your part of the planet , Miss our banter,hope your in good health . Great post Andre , but they always are , pot stirrers and all XO
    God Bless
    Greeneyes

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s