Hey all :)

I don't normally link videos, but this one was significant for what it caught - a watershed moment, I think, yesterday with regard to the generational shift and attitudes towards same-sex relationships and marriage in the heartland. Specifically, Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal was recorded on film responding to Minority Leader Paul McKinley, giving his reasons why he would *not* co-sponsor a bill with him to amend the Iowa Constitution to prevent gay marriage (and thus negate the bill legalizing it that has just passed). The piece de resistance comes very early in the video (although his statement at the end is very heartwarming), but between this realization making it to the midwest, and Vermont legalizing gay marriage by *legislative* process, as opposed to court decision, I think the generational tipping point, much as in the civil rights movement with regard to segregation laws, has finally come...

Awesome, if pedantic, awesomeness here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2s2R5qKhbo

Regards,
Nydia

P.S. Towards the beginning of the video, check the aide moving around in the background, and specifically, that tie ;). Coincidence? I think not... :)

OMG that guys tie was so gay......hey wait a minute....oh I get it.

"We're sorry, this video is no longer available."

awww, I'll have to see if I can find a mirror, at work atm...

Its a beautiful thing

And I think you are right Nydia.. This IS a tipping point.

The battle has been fought, and you (and all of us really) have won.

Sounds good to me...

Thanks for the video Nydia :)

That was very affecting. Cheers.

Two thumbs up!

An kind of an addendum to, and additional evidence for the Iowa vote being the watershed moment for gay marriage rights, this week at the Miss USA pageant, Miss California was *asked* (by Perez Hilton, a notorious celebrity blogger) how she felt about gay marriage, and when she spoke up (somewhat incoherently, there's a video on Youtube I'll try to run down) stating that she thought marriage should be between a man and a woman, she was met with boos and she is now claiming that this lost her the crown:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8009400.stm

I'll try to dig up the YouTube video, but it's just a bit more evidence that the watershed moment on this issue has been reached...

Regards,
Nydia

She was also met with many cheers. While I don't give two shits about gays getting married she stood up there and gave her honest opinion, which is what she was asked to do. She did not bash anyone else for their opinion of the same subject. I say bravo for standing up for her opinion. she should have won and for little faggy judged top base his sole decision her answer on it was shameful just because he disagreed with her. Then again who gives a damn about the miss USA anyways..

She was also met with many cheers. While I don't give two shits about gays getting married she stood up there and gave her honest opinion, which is what she was asked to do. She did not bash anyone else for their opinion of the same subject. I say bravo for standing up for her opinion. she should have won and for little faggy judged top base his sole decision her answer on it was shameful just because he disagreed with her. Then again who gives a damn about the miss USA anyways..

Holy shit... I agree with OSG 100% on this one!

You ever admit that in public Jedd I will disavow any knowledge of the incident and claim I was hacked.

I think you're misunderstanding why I mentioned it. To me, the indication that gay marriage has 'jumped the shark' as it were with regard to acceptance is that the question was asked at a *Miss USA* pageant - beauty pagents aren't generally known for being on the cutting edge of controversy. It wasn't my intent to judge her response one way or another - although the fact that this was met with a mixed response isn't surprising as beauty pageants are often a mix of very conservative and very gay elements :).

Regards,
Nydia

I saw a beauty pagent chick get asked what she thought of Affirmative action..... oh that was funny as hell! Her answer revolved around being positive or some shit like that LOL

To further the premise Nydia raises, I came home from work today and turned on the news and there was a clip of Matt (I suck as a journalist) Lauer and the *poor* California contestant discussing her response to the question.

For the record, I too agree with Osg on this issue.

First, the pseudo-celebrity-wannabe blogger that posed the question did a great job of showing his bias when he later stated that her response directed his vote on her; he did not want to vote for someone who answered honestly, only someone that would cater to his preference.

Second, she did show her blond roots when she started her reply with "In my country....", but she stated clearly what she believed, and did so without disrespecting anyone else for their personal belief on the subject.

Third, if we are going to inject such issues into our "beauty" pageants, let us at least have someone of some measured integrity forming and asking the questions.

So she said what she thought, that doesn't make her right...it makes her a bigoted idiot.

But, an honest biggot.

More power to her or anyone for saying how they feel in a public setting of this scale. Perez Hilton is a dumbass and about as important in the grand scheme of things as Paris Hilton. However, it is interesting to see how far and wide the issue of gay marriage is reaching.

My own personal feelings in the matter are that Perez Hilton showed more bigotry than she did by blatanly not voting for her b/c she didn't answer how he wanted her to. They have been playing this clip over and over on the gay satelite radio channel and I've already listened to more commentary and opinions on it from people in the community than I care to anymore. Did I mention I think Perez Hilton is a retard wannabe?

It probably did lose her the competition, not based on her opinion but how well she represented herself when presenting it....in theory. She didn't do a great job answering the question from a presentation point of view...and that's all she should have been judged on.

If she was judged based on her opinion on the subject, that's just flat wrong.

Perez Hilton being a judge on this event shows just how low and how little this event means anymore.

Perez Hilton being a judge on this event shows just how low and how little this event means anymore.


Did it ever really mean anything?

No , not really but they fooled many into believing they had social relevance (sp).

Quite a few years back while moonlighting as a PI one of my partners was the runner up in the Miss New Jersey contest. She was quite the looker, her first name was Laurie, but the scary thing was that she could be really pissed and bitchy and at the snap of a finger break into one of those pageant smiles...used to freak me out but showed how truly shallow she and the pageant women can be.

So she said what she thought, that doesn't make her right...it makes her a bigoted idiot.

Soooo you'd like her for forgo her integrity and lie? Bigoted or not thats just as wrong. If not more so.

Soooo you'd like her for forgo her integrity and lie? Bigoted or not thats just as wrong. If not more so.

No I didn't say she should lie...I said She is a bigot.

So she's not allowed to have her own beliefs? I'm not sure this is quite with the program here. Far as I know what she said is perfectly covered under the Freedom To Speech clause eh?

If someone doesn't believe as you believe that make'em a bigot? I'm not saying I agree with her, and I don't, but she has the right to her beliefs.

She's no more a bigot than you are for calling her a bigot!! errr chicken/egg!!!

So she's not allowed to have her own beliefs? I'm not sure this is quite with the program here. Far as I know what she said is perfectly covered under the Freedom To Speech clause eh?

If someone doesn't believe as you believe that make'em a bigot? I'm not saying I agree with her, and I don't, but she has the right to her beliefs.

She's no more a bigot than you are for calling her a bigot!! errr chicken/egg!!!


So I know people that actually believe that black people should be called niggers and they should not be allowed the same rights as whites. If I call them bigots that means I'm a bigot? Her saying that gays should not be afforded the same rights in marriage than non gays is just her opinion and calling her opinion bigoted makes me a bigot?

That's ridiculous...so what you are saying is that we should have no standard of tolerance and being intolerant is ok? That kind of makes the whole blacks can't marry whites thing or other mixed race marriages thing have validity then.

Which makes it ok for people to say that all of our financial problems are caused by the jews and even though we might not now place them in camps it is ok to say we should as that is just an opinion and one that should not be called bigoted because calling it bigoted makes one a bigot?

So Fandros is basically saying that Ahmadenutjob is not a bigot or racist at all.. It is just his opinion that gays should be hung, or that Jews should die in a fire!

So she said what she thought, that doesn't make her right...it makes her a bigoted idiot.


And how are you not the same by making this post?

You are saying the same as Perez Hilton; either say what I wish to hear or you are wrong!

She voiced the opinion based on what she was raised with, and did not waver.

You have the belief (I am thinking based on how you were raised) that it is right to serve your country and fight for it. But, if you found yourself suddenly in a situation where you were being asked about that belief, and finding it being challenged, would you change what you say to suit the audience? Or, would you maintain what you have been raised to believe was right? It is not a question of whether we agree with her, but whether she demonstrated integrity in her beliefs as she was raised.

I think she did herself proud, even though I disagree with her attitude.

And how are you not the same by making this post?

You are saying the same as Perez Hilton; either say what I wish to hear or you are wrong!

She voiced the opinion based on what she was raised with, and did not waver.

You have the belief (I am thinking based on how you were raised) that it is right to serve your country and fight for it. But, if you found yourself suddenly in a situation where you were being asked about that belief, and finding it being challenged, would you change what you say to suit the audience? Or, would you maintain what you have been raised to believe was right? It is not a question of whether we agree with her, but whether she demonstrated integrity in her beliefs as she was raised.

I think she did herself proud, even though I disagree with her attitude.

you think the fact that she was raised in an ignorant fashion justifies her bigoted views? what the shit.

You guys have scewed views of what intergrity is.... She voiced her opinion (which I don't agree with mind you) and is being punished and all I wanted to do was see her tits!

all I wanted to do was see her tits!


LOL, Ditto!

You guys have scewed views of what intergrity is.... She voiced her opinion (which I don't agree with mind you) and is being punished and all I wanted to do was see her tits!


I'll go with that but it involves seeing them in a lesbian environment.

In addressing Byl, she gave her opinion, Perez gave his and I gave mine so why are Peresz and myself wrong? She feels gays are wrong?

Ostensibly, the judges are impartial, no?

I saw one of the other judges speak about it. He said that he voted yes for her based on the answer as he felt her honesty was the way to be although he did say he did not agree with her position on the matter. It is just an opinion but one that in my opinion is built on bigotry;

In reality this thread has shown we are all bigots from all sides.

Wasn't Perez a judge (I haven't watched this brain-dead garbage myself)?

Wasn't Perez a judge (I haven't watched this brain-dead garbage myself)?


yes

That's why it was wrong for him to judge her partially (you asked that a few posts back).

Perez Hilton is a snarky little bitch, but how she 'should' have been judged on the question is a bit thornier than that.

One can be reductionist and say that she should have been judged solely on the thoughtfulness, clarity of expression, and poise with which she delivered that answer; on those grounds *I'd* have marked her down if only because she was fairly incoherent in her response.

However, Rover makes a valid point, and in another sense this *is* like being handed a question on segregation or miscegenation in, say, 1964 - to many people at that time, coming out pro-segregation would have seemed like a perfectly normal and 'acceptable' response, but to a growing majority, it would have smacked of bigotry and hatred unbecoming a Miss USA. The question is, where are we on that curve with regard to gay rights? I'm not sure anyone knows...

It was wrong for Perez Hilton to express so emphatically and publically that he voted her down because of the *content* of her answer; but whether or not you think the question was 'fair' in the first place, I think it showed some chutzpah for them to allow it, and I hope that the questions given the other finalists were similarly provocative (for them to have been otherwise would have been unfair to Miss California as well).

Regards,
Nydia

you think the fact that she was raised in an ignorant fashion justifies her bigoted views? what the shit.

Where did I say that, just for argument's sake?

I'm confused...isn't the whole purpose of a judge to judge someone on their answers, perhaps both on quality and delivery?

She took a stance, the judge didn't like it, them's the rules. These Miss Soandso pageants always seem to include some measure of character anyhow...so I'm not sure what the actual contention is.

By that logic, would you be defending Pat Robertson if he'd voted against a lesbian due to his own personal bias?

I'm confused...isn't the whole purpose of a judge to judge someone on their answers, perhaps both on quality and delivery?

She took a stance, the judge didn't like it, them's the rules. These Miss Soandso pageants always seem to include some measure of character anyhow...so I'm not sure what the actual contention is.

I was always under the impression the judges were to judge the skill shown in presenting their idea and the delivery. Not the actual content.

They threw in the political grenade with that question and I scoff at the idea that they didn't purposely hand that question to Perez. Another fake celeb the world could do without.

By that logic, would you be defending Pat Robertson if he'd voted against a lesbian due to his own personal bias?

Then what's the point of asking her a question?

To judge her response, not to punish her for not pandering to the personal biases of the judge.

To judge her response, not to punish her for not pandering to the personal biases of the judge.

And he judged her response as he saw fit...just as obviously a majority of the judges did...she lost.

He specifically said that he judged it based on his bias. There's no way around that being lame, whether you agree with her or not.

He specifically said that he judged it based on his bias. There's no way around that being lame, whether you agree with her or not.

Yes and another judge said specifically that he judged her positively because she said what she said very candidly. Hilton has a bias for all things gay and Willy Geist has a bias for candid answers.

Judging an answer positively for being candid isn't a bias; it's doing the job right instead of using it as a soapbox.

Judging an answer positively for being candid isn't a bias; it's doing the job right instead of using it as a soapbox.

LOL...Yeah because that is the way you would have judged.

I'm on record here, going back years and years, in favor of equal marriage rights. So, just go ahead and avoid that Vietnam of an argument before you mire yourself in it.

I'm on record here, going back years and years, in favor of equal marriage rights. So, just go ahead and avoid that Vietnam of an argument before you mire yourself in it.

Are you retarded? Where did you pull that from? Maybe I'm making the wrong association here but it seems you think that voting yes because she gave what is considered a candid response was the right vote and within the rules and that voting no because you feel she is a bigot is wrong. Stop trying to twist what I'm saying.

Heres a clue...there are no rules on how a judge bases their vote, that is directly quoted from a judge who voted yes on her.

I thought this was about whether she is in fact a bigot who speaks candidly or a closet bigot. You like the candid bigot as well as do I. I never said, inferred, thought, wanted, or advocated her giving anything less than an honest candid answer...I simply stated my opinion that her opinion is based in bigotry. That is an indisputable fact.

Yeah, she's clearly a big, mean bigot:

“Well I think its great that Americans are able to choose one or the other,” she said. “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that 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. Thank you very much.”

There's sad sort of hilarity in the politically correct types labeling her a "bigot" for calling equal rights "great", and then simply expressing her own personal beliefs.

But, hey, congrats on aligning yourselves with this sort of comedy: http://master.perezhilton.com/2009-04-19-everyone-is-entitled-to-their-own-opinion-but

LOL..yeah I'm really politically correct.

Uh... It was not a big deal, but I also think it is idiotic to expect a judge to not judge based on the beliefs of the contestant.

They are voting for who will represent the United States, and it is perfectly valid to consider someone who is against equal rights for all Americans not fit for that title.

(If I am wrong in what winning actually entails, please correct me. I know VERY little about these pageants.)

Is she against equal rights? She said that was "great".

Is she against equal rights? She said that was "great".


Yeah equal rights are great...except in the case of gay marriage.

Her presentation sucked, to be sure.

But she is to be commended for being honest, and voicing her beliefs, bigoted or not.

Rover, if Perez would have said, "I don't agree with the content of what she said. However, her presentation is what I judged her on, and I found it to be lacking." no one would have batted an eye.

Instead, he made it sound like because she didn't say what he wanted to hear, he voted against her. Probably just a big miscommunication, as tends to be with these issues.

because she didn't say what he wanted to hear, he voted against her.


You know, I've never been a victim of discrimination as far as I know. So I can only imagine how Perez feels when he hears someone say that basically he should not be afforded equal rights because of his sexual orientation. I look at being gay as innocuous to me, it makes no difference in my life if someone is gay or straight. It does however make a difference in my life if someone is discriminated against because of the way they were born, be that gay, straight, black, white asian etc. I don't know why...it just really bothers me.

Now let me ask this, if she said..In my country in my family...we don't believe that black people should be allowed to marry white people that it is not what a marriage should be because it might create an impurity of the races.

Would that be ok? Would people here be saying...I give her credit? Or would we say...that thinking is just wrong and bigoted and she needs to change her thinking.

Perez is born gay...she was taught to think that way...thoughts can be changed.

If it was her honest opion no matter how scewed it may be my original post stands... Any tits pics yet?

if it was her honest opion no matter how scewed it may be my original post stands... any tits pics yet?


lol

By that logic, would you be defending Pat Robertson if he'd voted against a lesbian due to his own personal bias?Remember the context - it's a silly pageant, not a political arena where policy affects real life.

I work in theater, and I've judged plenty of events professional and amateur - though thankfully never a beauty contest. I've worked with other judges who have commented later that they scored a performance low based on GLBT issues, and while I don't personally agree that is their prerogative, and that's exactly why you have multiple judges. When I coach performers I always make it very clear that their material selection needs to apply to a wide audience.

Besides, very little of these things are real, unless the women are all sitting comfortable in their favorite clothes with no makeup. If you're faulting her for being judged on one point of honesty, then you need to question everything else she did to make her self more presentable to the judges. Why not fault her and other contestants for the lies, as it were, rather than her answer to the question and a judge's honest reaction?

Now let me ask this, if she said..In my country in my family...we don't believe that black people should be allowed to marry white people that it is not what a marriage should be because it might create an impurity of the races.



I would applaud her honesty, but I would also think she is a small-minded fool.

I'm not agreeing with her stance, in any way. I'm just saying it takes conviction to stand there, and say something you know is going to be terribly unpopular, rather than say something that the crowd wants to hear.

And pagents don't really affect much, except the quality of boob pics, as Osg points out.

She's so honest she's making it her job!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/30/miss-california-carrie-pr_0_n_193503.html