During the recent Miss USA Pageant, Miss California Carrie Prejean was asked the following question by openly “gay” activist and pageant judge Perez Hilton:

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

Perez Hilton showed nothing but disdain for Prejean’s honest and straightforward answer: “I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I think it should be – between a man and a woman.”

Hilton promptly marked Prejean’s scorecard with a zero and later said, “She lost not because she doesn’t believe in gay marriage. Miss California lost because she is a dumb b—h.” Miss Prejean later stated, and Hilton’s immature reaction only confirms, that her response to Hilton’s question cost her the crown.

Despite Hilton’s angry and callous statement, Prejean, a conservative Christian, displayed real class and an admirable example of grace and mercy when she replied to Hilton’s comments: “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.”

Don’t miss David Kupelian’s culture-war classic, “The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom”

There is a bigger issue going on not only in the lives of homosexual advocates like Perez Hilton, but also in our society as a whole. In state after state where the issue of same-sex marriage has been voted on by the people, there have been constitutional amendments approved protecting marriage as between a man and a woman. Even the liberal state of California, Prejean’s home state, rejected same-sex “marriage” in Proposition 8 just last November.

Nevertheless, even more damaging than what pageant judge Perez Hilton has done is what unelected appellate court judges have done in states like Massachusetts, California and Connecticut in rejecting the will of the people in favor of their own activist agendas.

On April 3, 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court followed suit in unanimously ruling that the Iowa Code’s definition of marriage as only between a man and a woman violated the equal protection provision of the Iowa Constitution. Like other states where judges are not elected, but appointed by their governor, the will of the people expressed in law and even popular referenda has been ignored.

In Iowa, the attorney general acted quickly to enforce the opinion, even threatening the Iowa county recorders with legal action if they do not roll over and start handing out same-sex “marriage” licenses, regardless of their conscientious objection. The people of Iowa may overturn their Supreme Court with a constitutional amendment, but such amendments are procedurally difficult to pass in Iowa and may not appear on the ballot for several years.

Activists like Hilton and numerous Hollywood celebrities gladly jump on board to criticize and vilify anyone who disagrees with their warped view of marriage and dares to say so. Their shameful treatment of any opposing opinion has likely intimidated others from honestly expressing their own views.

For example, another Miss USA contestant, Miss Connecticut Monica Mary Pietzula, responded to Prejean’s comments by stating that you have to be politically correct about “answering a question like that … to help accommodate all beliefs.” Alison Cromin, Miss Massachusetts, said she was shocked at Miss Prejean’s answer and even “surprised that she would say it, knowing the demographic she was speaking to.”

But Carrie Prejean was merely stating her Christian beliefs and the definition of marriage since creation. Jesus had some words for the Pharisees that seem appropriate for people like Perez Hilton:

Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (Matthew 19:4-5)

Miss California’s refusal to deviate from the truth may inspire others to stand on principle even at the expense of their own dreams and aspirations.

Since when did denying what you think simply to appease others to get what you want become a celebrated virtue? Homosexual activists constantly promote tolerance and “being true to yourself” – except when you oppose their views. That is hypocrisy, and it has some dangerous ramifications.

The fact is that in a few years, Miss California’s words could not only cost her a beauty pageant title but could place her behind bars. Congress is again considering a bill to make it a federal “hate crime” to commit certain acts because of the victim’s “gender identity” or “sexual orientation.” Although Democrats have tried to assure the public that mere speech would not be impinged under such “thought crimes,” just last week on April 23, Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas, let it slip that the “hate crimes” bill was designed to “protect those potential victims who may be the recipients of hateful words or hateful acts.”

At the same time, Perez Hilton’s venomous response to Miss California’s statement has really done us a favor: It has shown us that liberals and homosexual activists will not rest until America accepts their redefinition of marriage as the next step in our cultural “evolution.” It has also emphasized their harbored belief that any who refuse to toe that politically correct line deserve hatred, discrimination and perhaps prison.

Liberal judges and radical homosexuals alike want everybody else to think and do as they say, even as they call “evil good, and good evil” (Isaiah 5:20). They protect freedom of expression for their opinions only, and they are prepared to bully, judge or jail any dissenters.

If you are not yet concerned, then you are not paying attention.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.