Intolerance - The New Definition Of "BAD" Is Good!

Freedom of speech is a sacred right, and privilege. We grant that right to each other. No one has the right in "MY" country, according to the Constitution of the United States of America - to take that right away from another person. For a select few, they don't seem to get this concept.

Meaning, that the majority of "The People" DO get that you can have an opinion about anything, and without fear - express that opinion to whomever and wherever you so choose. If you're passionate about your position, you may even attempt to persuade others through various means of communication.

Bottom line - it's our independent opinion's collectively gathered, that generally govern this Land. But voices must be heard from all of our citizens, in order to gather and unite that which we value in mainstream society. This is a system, that was enacted by a moral society. If the general population were not of a "moral" nature - this could never work; and what many are attempting to proclaim could be a concern. But, it is not.

The "majority" of Americans support maintaining the traditional definition of marriage. A minority of very loud advocates for same-sex marriage, are now taking that opinion and right to believe- and are now attempting to define it as hate speech. They want to take it personally. They want to be offended and hurt. They feel that if they can make the majority the bad guy, that enough of the majority will cave. Some are.

They want to make US be seen as BAD people for having an opinion that is contrary to what they WANT!

They especially enjoy using mainstream media to support their positions. No doubt that a certain judge in the recent Miss America Pageant was hoping to do just that, when he asked in particular "Miss California" Carrie Prejean - her thoughts about same-sex marriage. If national attention was what he was hoping to gain, boy did he get it!

Miss California
, did not answer his question the way he had assumed that she would. In fact, from his position on the topic of legalizing same-sex marriage - Carrie Prejean committed blasphemy!

Excuse me... all she did, was respectfully as requested, "No Offense" intended -state her personal opinion. And that is when all H - E double toothpicks broke loose! That judge and his friends have now decided that this is a perfect platform for them to zero in on their new definition of HATE SPEECH; conservative opinion that is contrary to liberal opinion, behavior and causes.

Sorry, but I've raised five children, and I KNOW a tantrum when I see one. When a spoiled "child" wants their way and is finding it difficult to obtain -- it suddenly becomes the fault of anyone in their path; and what they are doing to block the way. The child never stops to think that perhaps what they want, is NOT best -- and that is WHY a good parent declines the request - in opposition to their very unattractive behavior.

In my opinion - Carrie Prejean is one WELL-BEHAVED WOMAN! I am proud to stand by Miss California as the announcement has just come out of Washington that she will join the GOOD cause to Defend Traditional Marriage on a NATIONAL level!

NOM Launches "No Offense" Religious Liberty Ad Campaign!

Miss California To Campaign Against Gay Marriage

Kathryn Skaggs

Update: Here's a great follow-up story on Carrie Prejean "Miss California Keeps Her Crown Against ALL Odds!"


  1. Totally agree. I feel like there are so many tantrums being thrown!

  2. I have always found interesting that those who complain the most usually do the least and those who go around crying that someone is speaking hatefully, has hatefilled language. Such strange times we live in. Thanks for holding up those who set a positive example.

  3. I’m not entirely sure how I stumbled on your blog, but I appreciate your heartfelt attempts to share your personal feelings about a variety of subjects. Having spent most of my 47 years in Southeast Idaho and Southern Utah, I’m very familiar with the Mormon Church and know what an important role it plays in the lives of its members.

    Having said that, I couldn’t help but comment on your recent post regarding intolerance, marriage equality and free speech. Certainly the recent public spat between Miss California, Perez Hilton and the “mainstream media” have once again brought a touchy subject to light.

    My disappointment with your position is that no one is suggesting that either through passage of Hate Crime Legislation or Marriage Equality (as demonstrated again today in Maine), that folks who don’t understand what it is to be gay are, in the process, precluded from voicing their positions on those things. No pro-gay federal or state legislation can ever dictate how it is you feel or what it is you say about homosexuality.

    What such legislation does do, however, is protect the rights of a minority class who are and continue to be subject to actual discrimination because of their sexuality. While you may disagree with such legislation, you can continue to voice your dissent freely.

    Unfortunately, what you’ve interpreted as an elimination of your right to free speech is more properly characterized as simple intolerance. As the American population becomes increasingly familiar and comfortable with homosexuality, the growing sentiment is that gays do, in fact, deserve the rights and privileges afforded all other Americans. As that population increases, your right to publicly state your opposition simply becomes less popular. By way of example, Mormons in the 70s were free to argue that Blacks weren’t entitled to the Priesthood (with “no offense” intended, no doubt) for whatever reason, but to suggest so on the public square would have been largely rejected. For the same reason, Church Elders wisely chose to modify Church orthodoxy to reflect racial equality.

    You and your fellow church members can continue to speak out against homosexuality today and tomorrow as freely as you have been in the past. But as our country becomes increasingly enlightened and tolerant, your perspective is and will fall increasingly out of favor.

    Finally, I should add that Perez Hilton does not speak as my or any other gay person’s representative. Given recent revelations about Carrie Prejean, I’m sure you’d like add that neither is she speaking on your behalf of your own conservative beliefs.


    Steven Hart
    Scottsdale, AZ

  4. Steven -

    Thank you for sharing your opinion in such a respectful tone. However, I don't agree with your parallels. This is much more serious for those who believe in traditional family values. Having an opinion that is contrary to what society desires to normalize, by demonizing that oppositional opinion - is frightening. When the flag is being raised that such opinions are "hate" speech, because it affects a "minority" is just wrong. I stand by my concerns in this post -- and I can only hope that in the future, I will not be penalized for having them.


Post a Comment

Popular Posts