Miss California
0
You might have seen it in the media about how Miss California got fired because of her stance on gay marriage. Sure they've said "There was a discrepancy with her contract." But come'on, who is stupid enough to believe that?
The gay rights activists say that homosexuals should have a right to marry, but a person cannot have a right to an opinion anymore? Kind of hypocritical in my opinion as it seems to be a basic right for EVERY Americans to have an opinion.
What do you guys think?
The gay rights activists say that homosexuals should have a right to marry, but a person cannot have a right to an opinion anymore? Kind of hypocritical in my opinion as it seems to be a basic right for EVERY Americans to have an opinion.
What do you guys think?
0
PersonDude wrote...
You might have seen it in the media about how Miss California got fired because of her stance on gay marriage. Sure they've said "There was a discrepancy with her contract." But come'on, who is stupid enough to believe that?The gay rights activists say that homosexuals should have a right to marry, but a person cannot have a right to an opinion anymore? Kind of hypocritical in my opinion as it seems to be a basic right for EVERY Americans to have an opinion.
What do you guys think?
It's marketing. It's not really that PC to be against gay rights and Miss Cali is a representative of the contest's sponsors. Bad image = less patronization of sponsors' products, so really it's perfectly fair to fire her for saying the wrong thing.
0
tsuyoshiro
FAKKU Writer
I think the real problem is that people pay way too much attention on what some beauty paegant contestants do. Seriously, why has this become such a large part of our culture, that they are treated like the ambassadors of our hopes and dreams? Who the hell cares?! As if her stance on gay marriage is going to affect anyone, I mean, do people seriously see her as a rolemodel for their children? Gahhh!
0
Actually, I'm quite willing to believe she was fired because she didn't show up to the contractually stipulated photo-ops.
The whole hoopla about gay marriage and her phone-call with Palin and her "being tempted by satan" was a dirt-cheap and transparent publicity stunt.
Even if she had genuinely been fired for her opinion, I wouldn't give a damn, to be honest. If you're daft enough to participate in one of these pageants, know your place - you're now a product designed for a purpose, so act like it. You gave up your right to a personality at the entrance.
And this is how the real world works: You do the bidding of your employer, or you're fired. If your boss is an evangelical Christian, don't extoll the virtues of Allah if he might catch wind of it. If your company demands that it present itself (by way of its employees behaviour) as child-friendly, don't go ranting about how much you hate kids. If you're in the army, don't think of being a real person even off duty - you'll be a "disgrace to your uniform" and axed.
The whole hoopla about gay marriage and her phone-call with Palin and her "being tempted by satan" was a dirt-cheap and transparent publicity stunt.
Even if she had genuinely been fired for her opinion, I wouldn't give a damn, to be honest. If you're daft enough to participate in one of these pageants, know your place - you're now a product designed for a purpose, so act like it. You gave up your right to a personality at the entrance.
Kind of hypocritical in my opinion as it seems to be a basic right for EVERY Americans to have an opinion.
And this is how the real world works: You do the bidding of your employer, or you're fired. If your boss is an evangelical Christian, don't extoll the virtues of Allah if he might catch wind of it. If your company demands that it present itself (by way of its employees behaviour) as child-friendly, don't go ranting about how much you hate kids. If you're in the army, don't think of being a real person even off duty - you'll be a "disgrace to your uniform" and axed.
0
sv51macross wrote...
It's marketing. It's not really that PC to be against gay rights and Miss Cali is a representative of the contest's sponsors. Bad image = less patronization of sponsors' products, so really it's perfectly fair to fire her for saying the wrong thing.Guess you have a point, but still doesn't satisfy my argument that it's hypocritical.
gibbous wrote...
Actually, I'm quite willing to believe she was fired because she didn't show up to the contractually stipulated photo-ops.The whole hoopla about gay marriage and her phone-call with Palin and her "being tempted by satan" was a dirt-cheap and transparent publicity stunt.
Even if she had genuinely been fired for her opinion, I wouldn't give a damn, to be honest. If you're daft enough to participate in one of these pageants, know your place - you're now a product designed for a purpose, so act like it. You gave up your right to a personality at the entrance.
Kind of hypocritical in my opinion as it seems to be a basic right for EVERY Americans to have an opinion.
And this is how the real world works: You do the bidding of your employer, or you're fired. If your boss is an evangelical Christian, don't extoll the virtues of Allah if he might catch wind of it. If your company demands that it present itself (by way of its employees behaviour) as child-friendly, don't go ranting about how much you hate kids. If you're in the army, don't think of being a real person even off duty - you'll be a "disgrace to your uniform" and axed.
Again, good argument, but still hypocritical. Still doesn't make sense to me that if you're going to be arguing for a right for gay marriage, you should be able to recognize one of the most basic rights called opinion.
0
PersonDude wrote...
Again, good argument, but still hypocritical. Still doesn't make sense to me that if you're going to be arguing for a right for gay marriage, you should be able to recognize one of the most basic rights called opinion.Well:
It's her right to disagree with gay marriage and to believe that it's all a test administered to her by satan.
It's the right of the proponents of gay marriage to abhor her opinion and call for her to recant.
So far, no hypocrisy in my eyes.
It would not be right for proponents of gay marriage to call for a law that bars her from stating her opinion. That would indeed be hypocrisy, and an outrage.
And yes, assuming she had been fired for her opinion, it would be deplorable from an idealistic point of view - but not hypocritical. From a realistic perspective, she (her media personality) was the product of a profit-oriented enterprise, and anything other than discarding her for harming the objective of this enterprise (PROFIT) would have been hypocrisy.
Dislike that? Change the rules for businesses so that everyone is entitled to a wholesome personality, no matter their employer's goal (PROFIT). Anything short of that is a waste of your time. Hate the game, not the player.
0
gibbous wrote...
PersonDude wrote...
Again, good argument, but still hypocritical. Still doesn't make sense to me that if you're going to be arguing for a right for gay marriage, you should be able to recognize one of the most basic rights called opinion.Well:
It's her right to disagree with gay marriage and to believe that it's all a test administered to her by satan.
It's the right of the proponents of gay marriage to abhor her opinion and call for her to recant.
So far, no hypocrisy in my eyes.
It would not be right for proponents of gay marriage to call for a law that bars her from stating her opinion. That would indeed be hypocrisy, and an outrage.
And yes, assuming she had been fired for her opinion, it would be deplorable from an idealistic point of view - but not hypocritical. From a realistic perspective, she (her media personality) was the product of a profit-oriented enterprise, and anything other than discarding her for harming the objective of this enterprise (PROFIT) would have been hypocrisy.
Dislike that? Change the rules for businesses so that everyone is entitled to a wholesome personality, no matter their employer's goal (PROFIT). Anything short of that is a waste of your time. Hate the game, not the player.
I guess I didn't think about it that way. Thanks for the argument.
I guess my argument was invalid. Thread is useless now.