In one of the greatest speeches since Paul’s sermon at Mars Hill, Pat Buchanan articulated–at the 1992 Republican Convention–what many Republicans today are trying to deny: that we are in a culture war. Back then, Buchanan was written off as a hack for clamoring for immigration reform. Back then, Republican elitists ran from Buchanan as he made the case against special rights for gays, against abortion on demand, against big government, against unconstitutional wars, against illegal immigration.
Four years after that, the debate regarding “gay marriage” started to materialize, as activists in Hawaii attempted to get that state to recognize gay unions. The thinking was that, due to the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution–in which states are required to accept the civil proceedings of other states–a “gay marriage” in one state must be recognized by the other 49.
This was why Congress passed–and President Clinton signed–the Defense Of Marriage Act (DOMA), which permitted states to disregard gay marriages that were otherwise accepted in other states. The problem with this legislation: it uses a federal law to circumvent the Constitution. The former must never be permitted to trump the latter, irrespective of what implications we are trying to avoid.
Other states have realized this dilemma, as–just like with the abortion issue–we are now one Supreme Court “landmark decision” away from forcing states to recognize “gay marriage”.
And with few exceptions, voters have consistently chosen to reject gay marriage, as bans have been approved overwhelmingly. Even in liberal states like Oregon and California.
Now, we have the foodfight over the Miss USA pageant, as Carrie Prejean–Miss California–gave a frank answer in opposition to gay marriage, when asked by
teabaggerpageant judge Perez Hilton.
The backlash was as predictable as it was utterly dishonest. Now, the homogamists are fighting to silence Prejean:
The war between Perez Hilton and Miss California is far from being over since he lashed out against her for declaring that “marriage should be between a man and a woman” at the Miss USA pageant on Sunday night. But it seems the self-confessed Queen of Media has changed his tune a little, initially he lashed out that Prejean gave “the wrong answer” to his question but now he said he marked her down primarily because he disagreed with her facts more so than her opinion.
“She started off on the wrong foot, she was spieling inaccurate information,” Hilton told Tarts at the Us Weekly “Hot in Hollywood” party at MyHouse on Wednesday night, referring to Prejean’s statement that ‘we live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage.’ “I live in the state of California and I can’t choose, the state doesn’t allow me. She was under pressure and she let the pressure get to her and dug a really deep hole for herself.”
But in any case, did Prejean really deserve to be called a “dumb b**ch”?
“She’s not apologizing and I’m not either. I would like to sit and coffee with her, but if she doesn’t want to meet with me, Equality California has also invited her out to dinner so hopefully she’ll accept their offer,” he added. “But I have to thank FOX, you guys have been up my ass but I don’t care — I can take it. I am thankful to FOX for keeping the gay debate ongoing.”
Meanwhile the Miss California State Director, Shanna Moakler (who has come under fire this week for reportedly ditching Prejean over her controversial answer) wants the 21-year-old to stop talking to the media and talk to Perez’s people instead.
“I know Carrie is very religious and God is a huge part of her life, but I was just surprised she went down that road and answered the question the way she did. I think it’s very necessary at this point (that she talk to Hilton or the Equality group) as we have a lot of openly gay sponsors who supported her and were not aware of her opinions on their lives and are now deeply hurt,” Moakler said. “Carrie is going to have to stop doing the press circuit about how great it is she used the First Amendment and her First Right, and really sit down with these people that she’s hurt.”
Well boo freakin’ hoo! Moakler and Hilton can attack Prejean in the media and the Internet, but they want Prejean to be quiet? What’s the matter, they can dish it out but they can’t take it?
All Prejean said was that she opposed gay marriage, that marriage should be between a man and a woman, and that this was the way she was raised. If that “hurts” someone who happens to be gay, well…they need to get the heck over it.
While my theology is conservative, my politics are quite libertarian: what consenting adults wish to do in their privacy is not the business of government to regulate. On that front, I would actually side with the gays. While my own sexual appetites–as a straight male–are quite moderate, I oppose anti-sodomy laws because (a) they target gays individually and (b) they can be easily used by government to harass, attack–and launch character assassinations against–any political enemies.
Still, if gay rights groups want respect, then they need to come to terms with reality:
- Most of us straight people do not appreciate gays touting their agenda in terms of “civil rights”. Perez Hilton is not Rosa Parks.
- Most of us straight people do not appreciate having a gay agenda crammed down our throats in schools and workplaces.
- Most of us straight people do not appreciate gays demanding that we recognize “gay marriage” at the same level as straight marriage.
If this were merely about them being left alone by government with respect to their privacy, they would have legitimate ground. We know that governments–liberal and conservative alike–have attempted to launch character assassinations against people based on whisper campaigns. From FDR to Johnson and Nixon, our FBI annals are littered with such cases. Gays deserve the same protections from government intrusion that any straight person enjoys.
On the other hand, for them to demand that we equate their lifestyles on the same moral planes as straight people, is childish bullying.
Carrie Prejean will have a fine career somewhere, assuming she manages to avoid becoming the next Anita Bryant.