Warning: This article contains graphic but accurate material that may be offensive to some readers.
You may have heard. During Sunday's Miss USA pageant openly "gay" activist and pageant judge Perez Hilton - the self-styled "Queen of Media" - ambushed Carrie Prejean - the openly Christian Miss California - with a politically loaded question on so-called "same-sex marriage." Prejean's candid answer - as both Hilton and Miss USA organizer Donald Trump later admitted - likely cost her the crown.
From the moment she opened her mouth, Prejean has given liberals a clinic in class. Hilton, on the other hand (a.k.a. Mario Armando Lavandeira), has provided the world a sneak peek into the soul of homosexual activism.
This is one for the up-is-down-black-is-white hall of fame. The media's fabricated flap over Prejean's answer - a public defense of legitimate marriage - has a reasonable America scratching its collective noggin in stunned disbelief. Not because of the answer she gave Perez - which was both well received by the pageant audience and overwhelmingly shared by about 70 percent of Americans - but, rather, because of Hilton's hate-filled, misogynistic response to her answer and the disgraceful, knee-jerk defense of that response by liberals in Hollywood, the media and organized homosexuality.
After Hilton asked the lovely and talented Miss California whether "every state" should legalize "same-sex marriage," Prejean responded: "In my country, in my family ... 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."
Oh the humanity!
Evidently this was not the rooty-tooty-fresh-n'-fruity answer Hilton - the creepy valley girl wannabe with a five o'clock shadow - had hoped for. He promptly marked Prejean's score card with a zero, plopped down in front of the television cameras and began blubbering away like a fussy little snot with a dirty diaper.
Having already publicly called Prejean a "dumb b----," he then yammered to a sympathetic Norah O'Donnell on MSNBC that, not only was he refusing to apologize, he was actually "thinking the C-word." This, of course, one of the vilest things anyone can call a woman. Yet, rather than taking Hilton to task for the boy lover's girl-hating poison, O'Donnell joined in on the bash-fest, criticizing Prejean for her traditional view.
But Hilton wasn't done yet. Ramping up his vicious attack on the Christian California bombshell, he dove headlong into the annals of dirt-baggery lore. He defaced a photo of Prejean on his weblog scribbling, below her chin, a crude depiction of a male phallus ejaculating in her mouth.
How did Prejean react?
While talking to Matt Lauer on NBC's Today Show she said, "I knew at that moment after I answered the question, I knew, I was not going to win because of my answer, because I had spoken from my heart, from my beliefs and for my God. ... I wouldn't have answered it differently. The way I answered may have been offensive. With that question specifically, it's not about being politically correct. For me it was being biblically correct."
On the Fox News Channel's Hannity program, Prejean shared, "You know, I forgive him. I know that he's angry for whatever reason. I know there must be a bigger issue going on in his life."
Like I said - Class.
Still, Perez Hilton - Hollywood's frothy-potty-mouthed little drama queen - isn't alone in his hatred for Prejean or the three-fourths of Americans who share her opposition to the novel and incongruous concept of "gay marriage."
For example, Wayne Besen, a prominent leader in the homosexual activist community, unbelievably went on Fox News' O'Reilly Factor to defend Hilton. He picked up Hilton's anti-Christian torch, incredibly charging that it was Prejean, not Hilton, whose millennia old recognition of biblical marriage "was divisive." Besen then added insult to injury and revealed his true rainbow colors by tagging the 70 percent of Americans who oppose "gay marriage" as "bigots."
This whole hateful affair provides the perfect metaphor for the current divide between defenders of traditional sexual morality and the extremist "queer" activist movement. As Congress debates the constructive repeal of both the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of "equal protection under the law" and the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and freedom of religion through passage of discriminatory and wholly unnecessary "hate crimes" legislation, this little episode once again reminds us that the self-described champions of "tolerance" and "diversity" are the most intolerant and hateful among us.
How soon we forget. Just hearken back a few months to the passage of California's Proposition 8, which restored the definition of natural marriage to the Golden State. There we all played witness to "gay" activist calls for church burnings, Mormon Temple vandalism, death threats against Prop 8 supporters and quasi-riotous assaults against peaceful Christian marriage supporters.
So, insofar as liberals continue to dig their own hole by defending Hilton and piling on Prejean, I submit they're doing the other 70 percent of us a favor. In their biting anger, they've cast aside the sublime mask of "tolerance," revealing an ugly, desperate and most intolerant countenance beneath.
For that, I say thank you. For your treatment of Carrie Prejean, I say shame on you.
Copyright ©2009 J. Matt Barber