You speak of marriage in the abstract I speak of the actual word. A marriage is defined as a religious cerimony. On a "Marriage Certificate" it is concidered a Legal Union in the eyes of the state. The State has no business recognizing any "marriages" they should only recognize Legal Unions. You can be married all you want all day long left and right in a church...does not mean crap to the State till you go get a license for a Legal Union.
Gays want "marriage"...whoopi...they get crap...they should just change their wording and get more done with less flack. Gays want Legal Unions not marriages.
As I said leave Churches to do or not do marriages as they see fit and let the State make Legal Unions for gays...well legal.
As for the interracial marrying laws...that has nothing to do with this issue. That was the State making the performing of those marriages illegal and punishable by law. That is not happening here. The State is just not recognizing the Legal status of gay couples. They are not criminalizing it.
Another seperate issue to this is is what is happening to our democracy...or supposed democracy...the rule of the many. Not the rule of the gay few. If the people vote against it then it is not allowed in our society. There is no universal morality or freedoms. Rights only exist if the majority choose to protect and keep them. Change the majority and you change the laws. That is democracy. Everyday America lose democracy a little more till we are nothing but a factious collection of petty PC rulers with a broken demoralized country that does not believe in itself.
It's funny how you currently crawl back from your previous statement. I haven't do a lot of research on polygamy nor do I know what effect it has on society. However if it can be proven that polygamy does not have a negative effect on society, I'm not against polygamy.
Solomon supposedly the wisest many to live in many religions had many wives....up with polygamy.
Everyday America lose democracy a little more till we are nothing but a factious collection of petty PC rulers with a broken demoralized country that does not believe in itself.
At this point, you probably should take a deep breath, lol. It's not that bad. Democracy still works fine although, we never really had a democracy to begin with. And the majority of the people have never contributed to it for decades anyways.
That's always the assumption we were raised under but that's not the reality. We have more like a federal constitutional republic with democratic overtones. Just ask any conservative and he'll confirm that.
People not participating is democracy is still a democratic choice. I know we are a republic, but a republic built on democratic principals that the will of the people tempered by a elite few would be the ruling base of this country. The founding fathers feared the masses. Feared them swaying back and forth wildly on issues. So instead history has shown us that the masses are pretty steady and slow to change their minds while our elite few swing wildly back and forth on issues. Our government was not suppose to take away the voice of the majority they were suppose to refine it.
Actually the majority of the people were against slavery. Most of your population lived in the north with no use for slavery or were recently come over from Europe where they saw themselves in competition for jobs with cheap labor of slaves. For economical reasons most of the states north of the mason dixon line had elected senator and reps that were openly against the practice of slavery. So the masses had it right again it was the government listening to the few that wanted to keep slavery around.
the population imbalance is another reason why the south lost. Besides not enough equipment they just did not have enough people for troops.
As for women's rights to vote the suffrage movement went state by state changing people's opinions at the state level till they had enough support in the masses to force the federal government to change the laws. The great thing about the masses is that their opinions can be changed, but like the wheels of justice they grind slow. It is our "everything fast" society that does not understand that opinions take a long time to change.
If you look into the suffrage campaign the government feared greatly the upcoming general elections before the bill passed that if they did not pass the 19th Amendment they would not win at the general elections that they passed the bill 217 to 163 in the House and 56 to 25 in the Senate. All that over fear of the masses being dissappointed in them.
Look, this entire thread is meaningless without a picture of the new Miss California. That will tell us all we need to know. If she's as good or better looking than Carrie, I'm willing to let it slide. If she's not as good looking as Miss Prejean, I'll be out there fighting for the restoration of her thrown with everything I've got. As far as Carrie Prejean is concerned, I wouldn't worry about her. She's achieved more fame than being Miss California or even Miss USA would ever have brought her. Does anyone even know Miss USA's name? I just know she's from North Carolina.
Just saw interview on Greta Van Sustern with her and that official from CA pageant.Nope she is not as pretty, at least I dont think she is.She also stated when asked by Greta about gay marriage that she would agree with the voters ,then Greta said CA voters voted against it so you would be against it?..She tried to deflect then...LOL ,there may be a 3rd runner up chosen now after she said that right beside the Ca official.
Carrie Prejean has stated she went to all obligations so it is between the lawyers now.
Ok, I watched the rebroadcast of Greta Van Susteren and saw the new Miss California and I agree. I think she's cute, but not as good looking as Carrie Prejean. However, to prove that I am not a male chauvinistic pig who is only concerned about looks, I think the dispute should be settled on their talent. So, put them both in a ring and let them mud wrestle for the crown, wearing nothing bathing suits of course. And the winner should be declared Miss California. See how enlightened I am.
You speak of marriage in the abstract I speak of the actual word. A marriage is defined as a religious cerimony. On a "Marriage Certificate" it is concidered a Legal Union in the eyes of the state. The State has no business recognizing any "marriages" they should only recognize Legal Unions. You can be married all you want all day long left and right in a church...does not mean crap to the State till you go get a license for a Legal Union. Gays want "marriage"...whoopi...they get crap...they should just change their wording and get more done with less flack. Gays want Legal Unions not marriages. As I said leave Churches to do or not do marriages as they see fit and let the State make Legal Unions for gays...well legal.
A marriage is not defined as a religious ceremony. There are certain religious ceremonies currently called marriages, not the other way around.
Im america at this moment in many, if a couple gets married, this marriage is recognized by the state. this is currently not the case with gay marriage.
Originally posted by Zindaihas Look, this entire thread is meaningless without a picture of the new Miss California. That will tell us all we need to know. If she's as good or better looking than Carrie, I'm willing to let it slide. If she's not as good looking as Miss Prejean, I'll be out there fighting for the restoration of her throne with everything I've got. As far as Carrie Prejean is concerned, I wouldn't worry about her. She's achieved more fame than being Miss California or even Miss USA would ever have brought her. Does anyone even know Miss USA's name? I just know she's from North Carolina.
Well, the vultures are circling, lawyers are now seeming to want to get involved (does this make you happy Sargay; I made a comment?!):
Carrie Prejean's Lawyer Accuses Miss California Officials of Fabricating Claims Plus Why She Was Axed From Model Agency
Carrie Prejean speaks at a press conference along side Donald Trump.
LOS ANGELES Carrie Prejean has been embroiled in controversy since she opposed same-sex marriage at the Miss USA Pageant earlier this year, and even after Donald Trump announced a month ago that she could keep her Miss California crown despite numerous contract breaches he gave his "blessing" for state pageant officials to strip her of her sash on Wednesday.
The 22-year-old was not informed of her termination until it hit the press on Wednesday morning and was very shocked over the decision. According to insiders, Prejean had developed a strong relationship with Donald Trump and had been in regular contact with him since the press conference in May thus was surprised he gave the green light to have coveted crown taken away.
"I am in shock that K2 Productions and the Miss California USA Pageant have taken the steps to fire Carrie Prejean today. The claim that she has an unauthorized book contract is false. She does not. The claim that she is refusing to appear is false. Carrie has been in constant contact with pageant officials seeking to fulfill her obligations," Prejean's attorney Charles LiMandri told Tarts in a statement on Wednesday.
"I have emails in my possession tied to the pageant organization as recently as last Friday citing future appearance requests for Carrie. She represented the Pageant in Las Vegas the weekend before last, and is scheduled to appear at a Special Olympics event this weekend in California, a cause dear to her heart. Everyone has been pleased with her appearances and excited to see her. If you need any further evidence of who is in bad faith: A radio host, Billy Bush says he is the person who informed Carrie she was fired. What kind of employer alerts the media before they speak to their employee?"
Even though Prejean is no longer the reigning Miss California, she is still welcome as a presenter at the Special Olympics.
"Carrie Prejean had indicated that she wanted to come as a volunteer during our Summer Games weekend. Part of the volunteer duties included presenting medals at one of our venues," a spokeswoman for the Olympics said. "We have not spoken with Carrie to confirm her attendance; however, since she has been a long-time volunteer with Special Olympics we would still welcome her participation."
However Pop Tarts has learned that this isnt the first time Prejean has been given the flick. Her former agent, Francine Champagne at Visions Model Management Los Angeles, released Carrie from her contract just over a year ago under claims she was "problematic."
"It gets a little sticky and there are so many things that I would rather not discuss but there are certain specifications that we have to be a model and she was not keeping her commitment," Champagne told Tarts. "I just felt like she was a little nutty and I'd rather not represent someone with that mind frame and I just think she is a problem, and I did not feel that she was of the utmost professionalism and she did not follow through on her side of the bargain so therefore we decided to cut our losses and let her go."
Champagne also said that Prejean failed to act her age.
"She's definitely a handful, she needs a lot of attention, she is a little bit bossy, her mother gets involved whereas she's an adult, and she doesn't need her mom to be calling us. At this point in time, we're a professional agency that deals with professionals and if they are under 18, absolutely we deal with the parents, but once they're 18 or over, we should be dealing directly with talent, not with their parents," Champagne added. "She definitely had the potential to work well, she's a very beautiful girl, but her personality and her uptightness gets in the way and its definitely a personality conflict with this business and her. She will not really bode well in this industry because she is too controlling and uptight and bossy. There are a lot of issues there with her and she's not really an easy person to get along with."
Carrie did not respond to a request for comment.
Hollywood Reacts to Axed Miss California
Former Miss USA turned reality starlet turned Miss California Co-Executive Director Shanna Moakler promptly resigned from her position after Donald Trump announced that Carrie Prejean could stay on as Miss California, stating that she could no longer "move forward supporting and promoting the Miss Universe Organization" when she no longer believed in it or the contracts she signed.
However Moakler was quick to Twitter her change of heart on Wednesday following the news that Prejean was dethroned.
"My faith has been restored in MUO and with Donald Trump. I truly believed eventually what I intimately knew, would come to fruition," she twittered. "At 16 and 19 I signed these same contracts, as well as thousands of other woman, we ALL lived up to them, none of us had them amended. This is fair."
According to an inside source, Moakler may return to her role as the state pageant director alongside Keith Lewis now that Prejean has been replaced by her first runner-up, Miss Malibu Tami Farrell.
Celebrity blogger Perez Hilton, who was a Miss USA judge and was the one who asked the former Miss California the controversial question about same-sex marriage, also gave his nod of approval.
Better late than never!" he exclaimed in an email to Pop Tarts.
However the National Organization for Marriage, which ran a PSA featuring Prejeans answer to Perez Hiltons same-sex marriage question, "Hollywood" had a vendetta against the beauty queen and wanted too see her fall in any circumstance.
"Hollywood hates Carrie. First they abuse her, then they try to get her to recant, then they threw mud, and now they are doing what they wanted to do from day one: Get rid of Carrie," said Brian Brown, Executive Director for NOM. "This cover story about a contract dispute doesnt pass the smell test. Americans arent fooled that easily. God knows, and we know, the truth about Carrie: Shes a young woman of great beauty who chose truth over the glittering tiara that Hollywood offers. Of course they will try to punish her, but we know she will be fine in the end, because her values are in the right place."
If this was purely a "beauty contest", I prefer Tami Farrell's looks.
I think her eyes are more exotic and mysterious looking while Prejean's wide eyed, tired look is commonplace and dated. Tami's hair is more free-flowing and natural in appearance while Prejean's hair looks starchy and stiff that no wind could move. It certainly doesn't look like hair you'd want to touch. Tami's natural and geniune feminine features are refreshing in this day/age while Prejean's siliconed figure is too cliche. It's really unfortunate the USA pageant spend all that money on fake breast enhancements for Prejean instead of encouraging her to enter as her Creator intended, sending mixed messages to young female fans.
Physically, Prejean brings nothing new to the table than the typical beauty queen stereotypical body. Tami's features of honest, wholesome feminine attributes vs Prejean's Mary Kay'ed, plasticized Barbie doll exxagerations send a good healthy message to young women that you don't need thousands of dollars in artifically injected bodyparts to succeed in life. Just keep true to yourself the way God made you, and eventually you'll come out on top. (as she did here)
Not having heard her platform and views and considering this is supposed to be a beauty contest, I would have to say I would have given Farrell my vote from the beginning.
Comments
You speak of marriage in the abstract I speak of the actual word. A marriage is defined as a religious cerimony. On a "Marriage Certificate" it is concidered a Legal Union in the eyes of the state. The State has no business recognizing any "marriages" they should only recognize Legal Unions. You can be married all you want all day long left and right in a church...does not mean crap to the State till you go get a license for a Legal Union.
Gays want "marriage"...whoopi...they get crap...they should just change their wording and get more done with less flack. Gays want Legal Unions not marriages.
As I said leave Churches to do or not do marriages as they see fit and let the State make Legal Unions for gays...well legal.
As for the interracial marrying laws...that has nothing to do with this issue. That was the State making the performing of those marriages illegal and punishable by law. That is not happening here. The State is just not recognizing the Legal status of gay couples. They are not criminalizing it.
Another seperate issue to this is is what is happening to our democracy...or supposed democracy...the rule of the many. Not the rule of the gay few. If the people vote against it then it is not allowed in our society. There is no universal morality or freedoms. Rights only exist if the majority choose to protect and keep them. Change the majority and you change the laws. That is democracy. Everyday America lose democracy a little more till we are nothing but a factious collection of petty PC rulers with a broken demoralized country that does not believe in itself.
Meh, mlauzon's not bothering anyone and he's getting a nice post count +1 bump.
It's no big deal, really.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Solomon supposedly the wisest many to live in many religions had many wives....up with polygamy.
At this point, you probably should take a deep breath, lol. It's not that bad. Democracy still works fine although, we never really had a democracy to begin with. And the majority of the people have never contributed to it for decades anyways.
That's always the assumption we were raised under but that's not the reality. We have more like a federal constitutional republic with democratic overtones. Just ask any conservative and he'll confirm that.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Supposedly right? If he was so smart, why'd he have that much baggage?
"TO MICHAEL!"
People not participating is democracy is still a democratic choice. I know we are a republic, but a republic built on democratic principals that the will of the people tempered by a elite few would be the ruling base of this country. The founding fathers feared the masses. Feared them swaying back and forth wildly on issues. So instead history has shown us that the masses are pretty steady and slow to change their minds while our elite few swing wildly back and forth on issues. Our government was not suppose to take away the voice of the majority they were suppose to refine it.
Well, if the government didn't do that from time to time, we'd still have slavery and women still couldn't vote.
See? It's not all bad.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Actually the majority of the people were against slavery. Most of your population lived in the north with no use for slavery or were recently come over from Europe where they saw themselves in competition for jobs with cheap labor of slaves. For economical reasons most of the states north of the mason dixon line had elected senator and reps that were openly against the practice of slavery. So the masses had it right again it was the government listening to the few that wanted to keep slavery around.
the population imbalance is another reason why the south lost. Besides not enough equipment they just did not have enough people for troops.
As for women's rights to vote the suffrage movement went state by state changing people's opinions at the state level till they had enough support in the masses to force the federal government to change the laws. The great thing about the masses is that their opinions can be changed, but like the wheels of justice they grind slow. It is our "everything fast" society that does not understand that opinions take a long time to change.
If you look into the suffrage campaign the government feared greatly the upcoming general elections before the bill passed that if they did not pass the 19th Amendment they would not win at the general elections that they passed the bill 217 to 163 in the House and 56 to 25 in the Senate. All that over fear of the masses being dissappointed in them.
Just saw interview on Greta Van Sustern with her and that official from CA pageant.Nope she is not as pretty, at least I dont think she is.She also stated when asked by Greta about gay marriage that she would agree with the voters ,then Greta said CA voters voted against it so you would be against it?..She tried to deflect then...LOL ,there may be a 3rd runner up chosen now after she said that right beside the Ca official.
Carrie Prejean has stated she went to all obligations so it is between the lawyers now.
Ok, I watched the rebroadcast of Greta Van Susteren and saw the new Miss California and I agree. I think she's cute, but not as good looking as Carrie Prejean. However, to prove that I am not a male chauvinistic pig who is only concerned about looks, I think the dispute should be settled on their talent. So, put them both in a ring and let them mud wrestle for the crown, wearing nothing bathing suits of course. And the winner should be declared Miss California. See how enlightened I am.
A marriage is not defined as a religious ceremony. There are certain religious ceremonies currently called marriages, not the other way around.
Im america at this moment in many, if a couple gets married, this marriage is recognized by the state. this is currently not the case with gay marriage.
I think this is what you're looking for:
Glad I saved it when I saw it on a forum one day.
--
Michael
Here you go:
--
Michael
Well, the vultures are circling, lawyers are now seeming to want to get involved (does this make you happy Sargay; I made a comment?!):
Carrie Prejean's Lawyer Accuses Miss California Officials of Fabricating Claims Plus Why She Was Axed From Model Agency
Carrie Prejean speaks at a press
conference along side Donald Trump.
LOS ANGELES Carrie Prejean has been embroiled in controversy since she opposed same-sex marriage at the Miss USA Pageant earlier this year, and even after Donald Trump announced a month ago that she could keep her Miss California crown despite numerous contract breaches he gave his "blessing" for state pageant officials to strip her of her sash on Wednesday.
The 22-year-old was not informed of her termination until it hit the press on Wednesday morning and was very shocked over the decision. According to insiders, Prejean had developed a strong relationship with Donald Trump and had been in regular contact with him since the press conference in May thus was surprised he gave the green light to have coveted crown taken away.
"I am in shock that K2 Productions and the Miss California USA Pageant have taken the steps to fire Carrie Prejean today. The claim that she has an unauthorized book contract is false. She does not. The claim that she is refusing to appear is false. Carrie has been in constant contact with pageant officials seeking to fulfill her obligations," Prejean's attorney Charles LiMandri told Tarts in a statement on Wednesday.
"I have emails in my possession tied to the pageant organization as recently as last Friday citing future appearance requests for Carrie. She represented the Pageant in Las Vegas the weekend before last, and is scheduled to appear at a Special Olympics event this weekend in California, a cause dear to her heart. Everyone has been pleased with her appearances and excited to see her. If you need any further evidence of who is in bad faith: A radio host, Billy Bush says he is the person who informed Carrie she was fired. What kind of employer alerts the media before they speak to their employee?"
Even though Prejean is no longer the reigning Miss California, she is still welcome as a presenter at the Special Olympics.
"Carrie Prejean had indicated that she wanted to come as a volunteer during our Summer Games weekend. Part of the volunteer duties included presenting medals at one of our venues," a spokeswoman for the Olympics said. "We have not spoken with Carrie to confirm her attendance; however, since she has been a long-time volunteer with Special Olympics we would still welcome her participation."
However Pop Tarts has learned that this isnt the first time Prejean has been given the flick. Her former agent, Francine Champagne at Visions Model Management Los Angeles, released Carrie from her contract just over a year ago under claims she was "problematic."
"It gets a little sticky and there are so many things that I would rather not discuss but there are certain specifications that we have to be a model and she was not keeping her commitment," Champagne told Tarts. "I just felt like she was a little nutty and I'd rather not represent someone with that mind frame and I just think she is a problem, and I did not feel that she was of the utmost professionalism and she did not follow through on her side of the bargain so therefore we decided to cut our losses and let her go."
Champagne also said that Prejean failed to act her age.
"She's definitely a handful, she needs a lot of attention, she is a little bit bossy, her mother gets involved whereas she's an adult, and she doesn't need her mom to be calling us. At this point in time, we're a professional agency that deals with professionals and if they are under 18, absolutely we deal with the parents, but once they're 18 or over, we should be dealing directly with talent, not with their parents," Champagne added. "She definitely had the potential to work well, she's a very beautiful girl, but her personality and her uptightness gets in the way and its definitely a personality conflict with this business and her. She will not really bode well in this industry because she is too controlling and uptight and bossy. There are a lot of issues there with her and she's not really an easy person to get along with."
Carrie did not respond to a request for comment.
Hollywood Reacts to Axed Miss California
Former Miss USA turned reality starlet turned Miss California Co-Executive Director Shanna Moakler promptly resigned from her position after Donald Trump announced that Carrie Prejean could stay on as Miss California, stating that she could no longer "move forward supporting and promoting the Miss Universe Organization" when she no longer believed in it or the contracts she signed.
However Moakler was quick to Twitter her change of heart on Wednesday following the news that Prejean was dethroned.
"My faith has been restored in MUO and with Donald Trump. I truly believed eventually what I intimately knew, would come to fruition," she twittered. "At 16 and 19 I signed these same contracts, as well as thousands of other woman, we ALL lived up to them, none of us had them amended. This is fair."
According to an inside source, Moakler may return to her role as the state pageant director alongside Keith Lewis now that Prejean has been replaced by her first runner-up, Miss Malibu Tami Farrell.
Celebrity blogger Perez Hilton, who was a Miss USA judge and was the one who asked the former Miss California the controversial question about same-sex marriage, also gave his nod of approval.
Better late than never!" he exclaimed in an email to Pop Tarts.
However the National Organization for Marriage, which ran a PSA featuring Prejeans answer to Perez Hiltons same-sex marriage question, "Hollywood" had a vendetta against the beauty queen and wanted too see her fall in any circumstance.
"Hollywood hates Carrie. First they abuse her, then they try to get her to recant, then they threw mud, and now they are doing what they wanted to do from day one: Get rid of Carrie," said Brian Brown, Executive Director for NOM. "This cover story about a contract dispute doesnt pass the smell test. Americans arent fooled that easily. God knows, and we know, the truth about Carrie: Shes a young woman of great beauty who chose truth over the glittering tiara that Hollywood offers. Of course they will try to punish her, but we know she will be fine in the end, because her values are in the right place."
Source: FOXNews.com
--
Michael
If this was purely a "beauty contest", I prefer Tami Farrell's looks.
I think her eyes are more exotic and mysterious looking while Prejean's wide eyed, tired look is commonplace and dated. Tami's hair is more free-flowing and natural in appearance while Prejean's hair looks starchy and stiff that no wind could move. It certainly doesn't look like hair you'd want to touch. Tami's natural and geniune feminine features are refreshing in this day/age while Prejean's siliconed figure is too cliche. It's really unfortunate the USA pageant spend all that money on fake breast enhancements for Prejean instead of encouraging her to enter as her Creator intended, sending mixed messages to young female fans.
Physically, Prejean brings nothing new to the table than the typical beauty queen stereotypical body. Tami's features of honest, wholesome feminine attributes vs Prejean's Mary Kay'ed, plasticized Barbie doll exxagerations send a good healthy message to young women that you don't need thousands of dollars in artifically injected bodyparts to succeed in life. Just keep true to yourself the way God made you, and eventually you'll come out on top. (as she did here)
Not having heard her platform and views and considering this is supposed to be a beauty contest, I would have to say I would have given Farrell my vote from the beginning.
"TO MICHAEL!"
In the news interviews I think Prejean is better looking.
I think she looks better in stills. Her mouth is large and her teeth are like horse sized. I prefer the petite mouth sized women.
Enormous teeth and Jolie-style lips are overexposed in the media too much nowadays. So many women go for that "full look".
Prejean has better legs than Farrell though.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Did you even READ the article? Nope? Ahhh....didn't think so.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club