When liberals become illiberal

Written By: - Date published: 2:59 pm, April 29th, 2009 - 36 comments
Categories: culture - Tags:

Much as I disagree with those who oppose the freedom of same sex couples to marry, I also can’t stand those that attack the freedom of speech beyond reason. Whatever happened to “I disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it”?

I’m referring to gay beauty pageant judge Perez Hilton’s mauling of Miss USA contestant Carrie Prejean,  whom he later abused as a ‘dumb bitch’. Hilton asked Prejean for her views on gay marriage. She duly answered the question by giving Perez her views, which certainly expressed her disagreement with gay marriage, but she also stressed she was just expressing a personal belief, and she did not attack gays at all. This was not hate speech. Also, her views were aligned with the laws of the state she was representing (California), however wrong you or I may think them.

So what’s the big problem? Sure, she may have a degree of intolerance, but certainly no less than Hilton.

I’m glad the world isn’t full of Carrie Prejeans, but I’m even happier that it isn’t full of scum like Hilton, who entrap people by asking their opinion in good faith and then verbally abuse them in front of millions for expressing it honestly and sincerely. What was she supposed to do? Lie?  Liberals betray everything they stand for when people like Miss Prejean are too scared to voice even mild-mannered divergence from the liberal consensus.

– John’s angry mate

36 comments on “When liberals become illiberal ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. BLiP 1
    29 April 2009 at 3:40 pm

    Not sure about that link, Guest.

    • BLiP 1.1
      29 April 2009 at 3:52 pm

      Beg your pardon – it is the correct link but just doesn’t seem to work for me.

      Interesting that you should raise this admidst other dicussion about the media. In this case, there has been significant misreporting and salacious nonsense.

      Basically, the contestant said that she was pleased that “all Americans” can choose a same marriage partner – actually, on those living in five US states have that freedom and that is why she was called a dumb bitch.

      • Graeme 1.1.1
        29 April 2009 at 4:13 pm

        That may be why she was called dumb; it cannot be why she was called a dumb B****.

        • BLiP 1.1.1.1
          29 April 2009 at 10:10 pm

          Aaaah – . It’s a denigration of women. Even if they are beauty contestants, they still deserve respect. Fair enough. Hadn’t even thought of that. Thanks Graeme. Then again, “bitch” is one of those words , like perhaps “n1gger”, where it depends on who’s using it . . maybe, dunno myself.

  2. Jasper 2
    29 April 2009 at 4:38 pm

    Being homo myself, I can’t understand Perez’s attitude. It’s similar to the right vs the left if you will.

    I fully respect other people may not have the same way of looking at the world as I do. Yes, I’m thankful to the older generation for fighting for the liberties we now enjoy as a result of their labours. However, others may not feel the same way I do. Personally, I think PDA’s are completely wrong, and seeing old white men with young Asian women is wrong too. Some people might like that, but I don’t. It doesn’t mean I’m going to try and get them to come around to my way of thinking.

    When people like Perez come along and get angry because someone dares to do the right thing, and stand by their viewpoints that gay marriage is wrong, it does nothing to endear the homos. Perez just threw a hissy as Carrie has a different viewpoint to his, and said an answer he didn’t want to hear, as he’s a blinkered snotrag. For that reason, Carrie gets my vote. Miss USA should be honest and proud to have her own opinions, which is why I’m disappointed Carrie didn’t win.
    Quite simply, just because you are, doesn’t mean you have to be.

    • jcuknz 2.1
      29 April 2009 at 7:49 pm

      What is the difference between old white men with young asian women and old white men and young european women? Apart from jealousy on the part of the viewers who can’t make it. Young attractive women have been selling themselves either in marraige or other relationships since the world began. Some women have bodies and others have brains, many have both and use what they have for a satisfying life.

  3. Ari 3
    29 April 2009 at 5:40 pm

    The key fact here is that Perez asked her. If you’re going to ask someone for their opinion when they haven’t said or done anything even related to the topic, what reason have you got to object to it?

    Not that I think Carrie Prejean was much better: Biblically correct, huh? Bet you eat shellfish, and you don’t stone to death women who are raped inside a city.

  4. Travis Bickle 4
    29 April 2009 at 5:41 pm

    She has a right to express her opinion. She is entitled to be a bigot. And though she is entitled to be a bigot, being a bigot is ugly.

    And ugly people just don’t win beauty contests.

    • Graeme 4.1
      29 April 2009 at 9:38 pm

      I’m not sure that merely having a view like this on marriage qualifies as the “narrow-minded intolerance”* by which bigotry – outside its historical sense – is usually defined.

      Certainly the view may arise out of a bigotry – if she opposed gay marriage because she considered homosexuals inferior etc. – but I’d argue the simple view isn’t enough to qualify.

      *Oxford English Dictionary

  5. Pascal's bookie 5
    29 April 2009 at 6:06 pm

    .HILTON: Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?

    PREJEAN: Well, I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage.

    And, you know what? In my country, and 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 that it should be — between a man and a woman. Thank you.

    BILLY BUSH (host): Thank you very much.

    She was talking shit. Did she somehow miss the fact that actually gays in her own state can’t choose to get married? Bear in mind that she knew the question was coming, and was apparently looking forward to expressing her views. It was a prepared answer that still came out as gibberish and completely wrong on the facts. She got first runner up, and is playing the martyr card for all it’s worth because one of the hosts, later, on his blog, called her a stupid bitch. Oh me Oh my.

    This is going great for her. She will probably end up as Palin’s running mate on the 2012 GOP ticket. At the very least she’ll have a ticket on the wingnut welfare train for a year or so, doing the interviews and hosting fundraisers.

    As for “I disagree with what you say, but I?ll defend to the death your right to say it?”, who is exactly is telling who to shut up in this little kabuki play?

  6. sceamingface 6
    29 April 2009 at 6:42 pm

    Dude, guest poster, you lost me when you called Hilton SCUM.

    Christopher Thomas Pryde may be scum but otherwise: steady on.

    as PB says above the DUMB BITCH says “In my cuntry, and in my family marriage should be between guys and chicks”.

    WTF? She marries within her family?

    that’s not allowed !
    but then, thoroughbreds – and she looks kinda that way – are closely bred, bloodlines, keep out the mongrel, glue the throwbacks.

    oh, AND she says IN MY COUNTRY. what? did she misread her cue card? You can’t say that!

    I watched Alan Shore marry his sugar daddy last night. Last Waltz .
    Obama ruined this show at just the right time. No jack intended.

  7. Lew 7
    29 April 2009 at 7:15 pm

    Tough call; stripped of all the glam, this is Popper’s Paradox of Toleration:

    If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

    (from The Open Society and its Enemies.)

    So while Hilton was right to take arms against Prejean on the issue, I tend to think that by genderising and personalising the insults he has shown as much intolerance as she did, and that’s not a win.

    L

  8. dad4justice 8
    29 April 2009 at 7:21 pm

    I am not a bigot, but I fail to understand homosexuals.

  9. Ruth 9
    29 April 2009 at 8:28 pm

    Are you aware that her gay manager paid for her breast implants?

    And to quote what has been said elsewhere – why do they still have these ‘pageants’ – is this dumbass bimbo supposed to be sexually attractive? Many men beg to differ.

    Sure everyone is entitled to their opinion, but they also have to deal with the consequences of that opinion.

  10. Jungle Feaver 10
    29 April 2009 at 10:24 pm

    I’m sorry but I’m calling bullshit on this whole post. It wasn’t that long ago when many girls her age would be bashing “coloured folk” justifying it as “personal belief”.

  11. infused 11
    29 April 2009 at 11:06 pm

    I don’t care about gay marriage, but I do have a problem with two same sex couples bringing up a kid. But hey, whole different kettle of fish :p

    • Lew 11.1
      30 April 2009 at 12:09 am

      Infused,

      I don’t care about gay marriage, but I do have a problem with two same sex couples bringing up a kid.

      Yeah. A kid should only ever be brought up by one couple.

      L

  12. infused 12
    30 April 2009 at 7:27 am

    Ah, nice typo there by me.

  13. sheesh 13
    30 April 2009 at 7:32 am

    [deleted]
    [lprent: Just banned you on another thread]

  14. vto 14
    30 April 2009 at 8:37 am

    seems to be a bit of anti white american girl feeling around…

    Bigotry and prejudice floating to the surface…

    Personally I have no problem – they have provided many many years of tele candy to rest my weary eyes on at the end of the working daze.

  15. vto 15
    30 April 2009 at 8:45 am

    Maybe the heading to this thread should have been “When liberals are exposed as illiberals”.

  16. Rich 16
    30 April 2009 at 10:09 am

    The guy said what he thought, to her face. I don’t see any problem with calling somebody else a homophobic jerk (is that a sufficiently non-gender-derogatory term?).

    Just because somebody has a right an opinion doesn’t mean that others don’t have the right to call them on it.

  17. grumpy 17
    30 April 2009 at 10:57 am

    Seems to be a lot of regular contributors rushing to identify themselves as “gay”.

    A lot more than most people would suspect given the general left leaning nature of this Blog.

    Is this Blog really “Left” or just a front for “Rainbow”?

    • BLiP 17.1
      30 April 2009 at 11:16 am

      You seem very curious all of a sudden. Is that just a flash drive in your pocket or are you pleased to be here?

  18. Whacky Lefty 18
    30 April 2009 at 11:14 am

    Before rushing to defend ‘free speech’, we should really look at where that comes from.

    It comes from the Plutocracy where freedom was only enjoyed by land owning men over 40yrs of age. Women had no rights & slavery was the economic base.

    If a ‘Man’ of that day could not defend himself he would loses face, standing and in all likely hood his land. This ‘freedom’ was more akin to a warrior culture than our democracy.

    To missrepresent ‘freedom of speech’ as a sacred cow is to ignore the reality of the freedoms, such as they existed at that time.

    All freedoms have limits & all actions have consequences.

    Love the irony of Sheesh being banned or was that the joke?

    • lprent 18.1
      30 April 2009 at 11:24 am

      Love the irony of Sheesh being banned or was that the joke?

      Nope. There are rules on the site (see policy).

      Abusing the sysop or post writers on their own site. This is viewed as self-evident stupidity, and should be added as a category to the Darwin Awards.

      If you note, he wasn’t even remotely on topic on his later comments. The first one he at least stayed on topic.

      At one stage last year we had trolls coming in and using every post to simply attack the site and the authors of the site with massive number of comments that were just repeats. Effectively they were thread-jacking every post. Eventually we got pissed off with it. This is a site run by volunteers, and for the purposes of discussion – not tirades that amount to graffiti. Stupidly dropping graffiti everywhere gets people what they deserve because it doesn’t contribute to debate.

      If they want to participate here, they have to follow the site rules. They can exercise their ‘right’ to free graffiti elsewhere.

  19. Philonz 19
    30 April 2009 at 12:54 pm

    This incident is another example of our reality TV ‘laugh at the stupids’ culture. These pageants are outdated and we should probably just ignore them but it seems that they have just turned into another excuse for us to laugh at people stupider, more ignorant, uglier, more deluded than us. This is why Susan Boyle was a hit, because we expected her to be rubbish cos she doesn’t look like a model.

  20. ballsdeep 20
    2 May 2009 at 1:36 am

    Sounds like a “dumb bitch” to me…

    Now it’s more than ‘”just her opinion”, now she is trying to crush the rights of others and influence other people with her bigoted POV.

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/televisionNews/idUKTRE5400DW20090501

Links to post