Ex-Miss California loooooves herself... on video.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Well, first off, she didn't parade around and she didn't say anything about all things pure and Christian. She made a statement about gay marriage. She was asked a question and answered with her personal opinion while emphasizing that it was a personal opinion. If anyone was parading anything, it was Perez Hilton when he asked the question.

Second, it's not like condemning gay marriage and then getting caught in a bathroom stall with a gay male (which also wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical since she could support homosexuality between consenting adults but be against legally recognizing this relationship). She condemned homosexuality, not masturbation. If she had condemned masturbation, that would be hypocritical. If you can't recognize the difference between masturbation and homosexuality, you have an issue.

Len, your argument is like saying that someone is a hypocrite if he says he doesn't think chickens should be raised in poor conditions and then gets caught doing insider trading. It's unrelated. By your logic, expressing an opinion would always be hypocritical because everyone has done something that might be considered wrong.

First.... she made a statement based on religion convictions. So yes, it was Christian based.

Second... red the news dude, the one caught in the bathroom was a Republican Senator. It's called analogy but it apparently escapes your logic.

--- how can someone say gay marriage is amoral yet make videos of herself masturbating for public consumption (translation = p0rnography)?? Is that NOT amoral then? If you can't recognize congruence in speech and action, you have issues.

now carry on... I managed to piss you off, which was the intention.

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

The girl was parading herself as the image of righteousness and morality, if you chose not to see well that's up to you

Edited November 23, 2009 by TävôLuDô

[SMR 368]

She's a hypocrite in the eyes of the left (not really - but they will portray her that way) because those with morals fail and it makes them hypocrites, but since the left is amoral they can run gay brothels from their homes and still be re-elected over and over again.

Everyone on this planet has done something when they were 17 that they regret. Well, except the libs. They were just "expressing themselves". And therefore, they were justified.

Wrong kid, but nice try.

It she had not gone around parading herself as a moral paragon of all things pure and Christian, this would not be an issue. She fvcked herself up by promoting one thing and doing something else. it's like condemning gay marriage and then being caught soliciting a gay male on a bathroom stall...

She never paraded herself around as a moral paragon. The story was her losing the pageant because of her answer to a question about the gay marriage law, not whether she was this great moral pillar of hope. Last I checked she wasn't married to another woman, so the hypocrisy is non-existent. Once again, your group is amoral, so there will never be hypocrisy.

So... wrong again commie. It wasn't a nice try though.

No she is not married to anyone (that we know of)... she was just making masturbation films at 18... which I guess is completely moral, right? Hence she was in a position to attack that which she thought of as immoral -in this case, gay marriage- correct?

My group?? Amoral?

Actually, she didn't attack gay marriage. She was asked a question and answered it. Anybody who has never violated their own moral system is either perfect or doesn't have a moral values system (amoral). Such an inconsistency is perhaps reason to not actively tell others what to do. But to knowingly misrepresent your own values system when asked directly is dishonest, regardless of how you have violated that system previously. The fact that you think past masturbation is reason to lie leaves me somewhat puzzled as to how your moral values system works.

All of this is assuming that her moral values system is violated by masturbation, which I can't confirm.

[SMR 368]

Well, first off, she didn't parade around and she didn't say anything about all things pure and Christian. She made a statement about gay marriage. She was asked a question and answered with her personal opinion while emphasizing that it was a personal opinion. If anyone was parading anything, it was Perez Hilton when he asked the question.

Second, it's not like condemning gay marriage and then getting caught in a bathroom stall with a gay male (which also wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical since she could support homosexuality between consenting adults but be against legally recognizing this relationship). She condemned homosexuality, not masturbation. If she had condemned masturbation, that would be hypocritical. If you can't recognize the difference between masturbation and homosexuality, you have an issue.

Len, your argument is like saying that someone is a hypocrite if he says he doesn't think chickens should be raised in poor conditions and then gets caught doing insider trading. It's unrelated. By your logic, expressing an opinion would always be hypocritical because everyone has done something that might be considered wrong.

First.... she made a statement based on religion convictions. So yes, it was Christian based.

Second... red the news dude, the one caught in the bathroom was a Republican Senator. It's called analogy but it apparently escapes your logic.

--- how can someone say gay marriage is amoral yet make videos of herself masturbating for public consumption (translation = p0rnography)?? Is that NOT amoral then? If you can't recognize congruence in speech and action, you have issues.

now carry on... I managed to piss you off, which was the intention.

I feel the need to point out that the video was made for a boyfriend. While the morality of that is questionable, I think most would agree that it's different than making a video for public consumption.

[The_Dude 1,142]

Well, first off, she didn't parade around and she didn't say anything about all things pure and Christian. She made a statement about gay marriage. She was asked a question and answered with her personal opinion while emphasizing that it was a personal opinion. If anyone was parading anything, it was Perez Hilton when he asked the question.

Second, it's not like condemning gay marriage and then getting caught in a bathroom stall with a gay male (which also wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical since she could support homosexuality between consenting adults but be against legally recognizing this relationship). She condemned homosexuality, not masturbation. If she had condemned masturbation, that would be hypocritical. If you can't recognize the difference between masturbation and homosexuality, you have an issue.

Len, your argument is like saying that someone is a hypocrite if he says he doesn't think chickens should be raised in poor conditions and then gets caught doing insider trading. It's unrelated. By your logic, expressing an opinion would always be hypocritical because everyone has done something that might be considered wrong.

First.... she made a statement based on religion convictions. So yes, it was Christian based.

Second... red the news dude, the one caught in the bathroom was a Republican Senator. It's called analogy but it apparently escapes your logic.

--- how can someone say gay marriage is amoral yet make videos of herself masturbating for public consumption (translation = p0rnography)?? Is that NOT amoral then? If you can't recognize congruence in speech and action, you have issues.

now carry on... I managed to piss you off, which was the intention.

I feel the need to point out that the video was made for a boyfriend. While the morality of that is questionable, I think most would agree that it's different than making a video for public consumption.

I think making it at all speaks volumes.

The funniest thing that I read was that during the deposition, she had first claimed that it was not her, then she claimed that she was 17 when it was made. Both of which were lies. During the deposition, they played the video and ms. prejean was sitting there, next to her mother watching it. How awkward is that?

[Mark&Steph 0]

Funny how all this pops up again right around the time her book is due out.

[Heracles 417]

Let me get this straight. Regardless of the fact of whether someone has your implicit permission or not, someone can take a video of you in the US and then sell it for a profit.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Booyah!

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I think making it at all speaks volumes.

The funniest thing that I read was that during the deposition, she had first claimed that it was not her, then she claimed that she was 17 when it was made. Both of which were lies. During the deposition, they played the video and ms. prejean was sitting there, next to her mother watching it. How awkward is that?

And the mom said.... "The Lord works in mysterious ways... I am so proud of you"

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

hallelujah

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Women masturbating for male viewing pleasure is the kind of behavior we ought to be encouraging.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Women masturbating for male viewing pleasure is the kind of behavior we ought to be encouraging.

[Peikko 1,575]

Let me get this straight. Regardless of the fact of whether someone has your implicit permission or not, someone can take a video of you in the US and then sell it for a profit?

That does seem a bit off, perhaps someone can explain how this works?

[IR5FORMUMSIE 850]

Let me get this straight. Regardless of the fact of whether someone has your implicit permission or not, someone can take a video of you in the US and then sell it for a profit?

That does seem a bit off, perhaps someone can explain how this works?

Sometimes people get lonely and they need an outlet for their sexual frustration...

[Peikko 1,575]

Let me get this straight. Regardless of the fact of whether someone has your implicit permission or not, someone can take a video of you in the US and then sell it for a profit?

That does seem a bit off, perhaps someone can explain how this works?

Sometimes people get lonely and they need an outlet for their sexual frustration...

I don't have an issue with people being able to do whatever they want to behind closed doors but this is a privacy issue. The only way this could acceptably be released as far as I am concerned, is if she gave permission either at the time, or later on. Being able to publish previously private material simply because you are no longer in a relationship makes a mockery of what is to be considered private otherwise which I don't find particularly hilarious.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

Women masturbating for male viewing pleasure is the kind of behavior we ought to be encouraging.

see, she's abstaining from real sex!