First, a little background: Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was asked a no-win question by a jack-hole of a pageant judge, "Perez Hilton"...
...and to make matters worse, he posted this video after the pageant.
Now, FreeAmerica and I probably agree on some version of the following premise: Miss California shouldn't have been punished for honestly answering a question she was asked. She has every right to her opinion and to express it when asked for it. But, that's where our agreement ends. Like many other things, FreeAmerica has chosen to turn this into a freedom of religion/speech straw man [See: "War on Christmas"]. She just couldn't resist. I understand.
Nonetheless, I couldn't help but comment:
I suppose, that if Miss California could prove that she lost the pageant based solely on her answer to that question, she might be able to make a case for religious discrimination. However, I see a few problems with that idea. First, she never mentioned her faith. She mentioned "in my country and in my family", so it would be hard to claim that they were using her religion against her...because she never mentioned it. A person could be opposed to same-sex marriage for reasons other than religion. Second, she was asked a question and allowed to give her answer. Some in the audience appreciated it, some didn't. Hilton obviously didn't. But, here's the catch; he too has the right to his opinion and to express it as he likes. No one is stopping either of them from expressing their opinion. In fact, I've seen some pretty harsh criticism of Hilton from liberals and conservatives. Simply disagreeing with someone, no matter how crass and/or cruel that disagreement may be, doesn't constitute an infringement of speech or religion. The more any group, Christians or otherwise, makes week claims like this, the more a "boy who cried wolf" scenario becomes likely. When your freedoms are really being threatened, no one will listen.
No comments:
Post a Comment