Miss California USA Carrie Prejean is in danger of losing her title.
Pageant officials Tuesday said they are looking into whether Prejean violated her contract by working with a national group opposed to gay marriage and by posing semi-nude when she was a 17-year-old model.
Pageant spokesman Roger Neal said Tuesday it appears Prejean has violated the 12-page contract all prospective contestants were required to sign before competing in the November state contest. The contract prohibits Miss California from making personal appearances, giving interviews or making commercials without permission from pageant officials. In the last 10 days, Prejean has made televised appearances at her San Diego church and on behalf of the National Organization for Marriage, a group opposed to same-sex marriage.
The contact also contains a clause asking participants to say whether they have conducted themselves "in accordance with the highest ethical and moral standards." As an example, it asks if they have ever been photographed nude or partially nude.
A photo of Prejean wearing only pink panties with her back turned to the camera appeared Monday on a gossip blog.
Prejean on Tuesday fired back that she has done nothing wrong and that she suspects she's being hounded for her anti-gay-marriage stance.
"I am a Christian, and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos." She added, "On April 19, I chose to answer a question during the 2009 Miss USA pageant in an honest and personal manner that expressed my views of the long-established definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. Yet my comments defending traditional marriage have led to intimidation tactics that seek to undermine my reputation and somehow silence me and my beliefs, as if opinion is only a one-way street."
Prejean, was first runner-up to Miss North Carolina in the Miss USA pageant April 19. Her response to a question about legalizing same-sex marriage, and subsequent statements that her answer favoring limiting marriage to a man and a woman may have cost her the title, have made her a media sensation.
Personally, I support Prejean. I found her open and honest answer far more genuine and refreshing than the canned and PC appeasing statements that one would have expected to hear.
ReplyDeleteAll the hatred being spewed at her by the media just shows how little free speech we're actually being allowed here.
If you say something bashing Christianity, or Heterosexuality, or bashing a conservative agenda, it's AOK. But try and say something that doesn't tow the politically correct line... and you get blasted.
Only protecting one viewpoint is not free speech... it's tyranny and fascist. People should be applauding her courage for saying what she believes. The issue with her contract is being blown completely out of proportion. She had a couple pics of her, neither of which are any more racy than what you might find in a sunday newspaper clothing sale insert for lingerie at sears.
oh you mean like the way the homosexual community, in the United States, is not allowed to marry (from a civil perspective), not allowed to take care of our partners, not allowed to be present with their medical needs if their parents choose for us not to be present? Hmmm, interesting how you Christians like to pretend your he victim when your the cause of 90% of the world problems.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to change the laws, work to change them, but don't trash somebody else for having a different view and exercising their rights. And what's with the generalization, there are no homosexual Christians?
ReplyDelete90% of the World's problems? Oh shut up and go get a life.
ReplyDeleteOh and get an education while you're at it. You're and Your are not the same thing.
I'm for equal protection under the law for same sex unions. But as the other person posting put it, "Don't trash someone else for having a different view and exercising their rights"
Don't you get it, if you trash someone for their viewpoint, then you should expect others to treat YOU with the same lack of respect.
Either you protect EVERYONE's right to free speech, or you lose your own at the same time you stop respecting their rights.