Topic: The whole Ms. California thing.

[Pugnate]

It is hard not to be caught up with it on TV. Basically, during the Miss America contest, she was asked by some celeb. judge who happened to be a famous gay columnist or something, about gay marriage:

So she gave an honest answer. Typically these women give bullshit answers (I WANT WORLD PEACE!!!!) to win votes or whatever, but she was honest.

So she lost and apparently she lost because of her answer.

He went online and said she lost because of her answer, and then called her a dumb bitch:

So what's up with angry gay people? Are they all like Madzim (from AOG?)

I actually disagree with her answer, because I do think gay people should have the same rights as others in America... but... I mean she gave her opinion. What did he expect her to do? LIE?

The guy seems like such a duck...err... dick.

[Cobra951]

Only minorities have a right to protection against bigotry and discrimination in America.  That's not how the principles are written.  That's just the way it usually goes.

[idolminds]

One thing thats funny is...does anyone know who actually won? But pretty much everyone knows about Miss CA. Losing that competition for that reason is going to make her more famous in the long run.

While I agree that the judge was a dick both for asking the question and calling her a "dumb bitch" later (and hes a "celebrity blogger"...what the fuck?), I don't think he was wrong in judging her based on her answer. Why else ask them questions if you can't judge them based on their answers?

[Pugnate]

What the hell is a celeb. blogger? Like WWTDD.com?

Why else ask them questions if you can't judge them based on their answers?

Yea that's a good point and made me laugh the way you put it.

I guess the difference is that it is more of a philosophical question, and a deeply polarizing one at that. I mean if he had asked her what 2 + 2 was, and she said zero, than sure.

But here, there is no right answer, is there? Well, I believe there is a right answer, but that answer hasn't been agreed upon by the American courts or the American people for that matter.

And then for her to validate her views on such a deep question, she needed more than the allocated two minutes or so.

[Xessive]

That was a bullshit call. The poor girl gave an honest response and she gets penalized for it, wtf?! That's like "What's you favourite colour?" "Orange!" "BZZZZzzz WRONG! You are horrible person."

Secondly, what the F compelled that judge to ask such a contraversial question at a beauty pageant? You're supposed to ask questions that have answers that are: incorrect, correct, or more correct. You can't judge a person based on an opinion, you judge them based on how accurately they can address a factual situation. Fascist a-hole. I really wish she was smart enough to just say "I think this is an inappropriate question and I refuse to answer it on the grounds that it is contraversial."

It seems to me that the people who have a problem with "gay marriage" only have a problem with use of the word "marriage" in terms of a non-traditional union. I think the term "marriage" should be cancelled from official records. If they just referred to it as something else like a "legal partnership" or a "contractual union" or a "personal merger" people would have less trouble accepting it. Let people who want to use the word "marriage" do so on a personal level. People put so much stock in it because of the emotional potential of the word "marriage" and its conotations.

I know this goes against my fight against redundant euphamisms but it could very well be a way around this crap.

For fuck's sake, people are allowed to live together and be practically married, or in certain circumstances fall under the "common-law marriage" category. What is the problem with having legal protection? I think now even roommates or housemates can have protective legal measures.

I'm not for gay marriage, I'm for the redefinition of marriage and other partnerships. A marriage is as it is defined by the two (or more) people involved NOT the gov't. The only reason marriage gets any legal or official attention is because of the legal conditions that need to be abided, particularly following a failed marriage. Businesses have partnership agreements that are essentially based on the same principles. So all I'm hearing is people accept it for a man and a woman, a company and another company, a landlord and his tenants, but not for two human beings regardless of gender? That's a double-standard and an inherent hypocrisy.

[idolminds]

Yeah, the whole issue has such an easy solution. The government needs to decouple the partnership/union and the legal standing that comes with it from the religious ceremony and whatever standing goes with that.

So any legal adults can get a "partnership" that legally is exactly like what a marriage grants now. All current married couples don't have to do anything, its all transferred in. Thats it. Churches can still marry people, and they can decide to not marry a gay couple if they choose. But the government shouldn't be able to tell gay couples that they can't have the legal rights that they grant.

Some people like to bring up stupid things like "what if they want to marry their dog? what if they want to marry a child? What if they want to have 2 wives?" Well...thats easy. Animals and children can't enter into contracts, this being no different. And if you can get two women to agree to such an arrangement, why shouldn't they be allowed? You just make sure you cant game the system (like the tax breaks you receive per person diminishes for each person in the contract to keep people from partnering with 20 others to get free shit). It doesn't hurt me any, so why should I say they cant?

[Pugnate]

*tear*

This way Schlotzky5 will finally find true happiness.

[WindAndConfusion]

After Proposition 8 passed, the situation in California started to get pretty bad. Right after the election a few people - not a majority, but certainly more than one - tried to blame the election results on "niggers," mostly based on exit polls that purported to show that blacks were more likely than whites to have voted in favor of Prop 8. Then when it came out that the exit polls were shit (surprise!), there were protests (that sometimes bordered on harassment) outside the businesses of people that donated large amounts of money to Prop 8 campaigns. There was also some hilarious anti-Mormon bigotry.

Cutting to the short of it, after the last election, some gay-rights activists decided that it's OK for them to sink to the same level as their opponents.

They may be right, but they're still wrong.

[Cools!]

Well, the scandal now is about Miss California's recently "discovered" modeling photos. Supposedly they are provocative and so she should be disqualified... Anyway, I haven't been following it so don't know the details.

With regards to the whole gay thing. Perez Hilton (the judge who asked the gay question) is a fucking retard. So is Miss California, but I give her credit for at least giving an honest answer.

[Quemaqua]

Cools sorta' sums it all up for me.

Either way, I think the moral of the story is that this country watches entirely too much television.

[W7RE]

Either way, I think the moral of the story is that this country watches entirely too much television.

I hate when people assume I watch all the same shows as them, or assume I even pay attention to commercials.

"You know that commercial where blah blah blah?"
"No, I don't watch commercials."
"Yea, but you see them when you watch TV."
"No I TiVo so I can fast forward through commercials, and I only watch like 3 shows."

Then they proceed to explain the commercial in detail so they can make their joke or comparison, so that I'm bored long before they get to the point.

[WindAndConfusion]

Alright, I just saw Carrie Prejean (Miss California) giving yet another press conference.

She is clearly a stupid attention whore and bears as much responsibility for this shitstorm as anyone.

[Quemaqua]

Gee, a beauty queen is an attention whore?  Stop the presses.

[Cools!]

Speaking of attention whores: Sarah Palin is on Miss California's side...

[nickclone]

Do I think she is wrong to be against gay marriage? Yes. Is it her opinion and her right to do so? Yes. Besides, she's Ms. California, not a politician so I don't see why anyone gives a rat's ass about what she thinks.

Also, I think that question is biased. A gay judge asking about gay marriage, was she supposed to say she loves gays? What about the other judges, do they support gays? Would they have a black judge ask her if she thinks blacks deserve equal right? It just seems like an inappropriate question to me with no right answer (like Xessive said). Whoever got the typical "world hunger" question got off easy...who isn't against world hunger?

[idolminds]

Not me. World hunger is great!

[W7RE]

I find the idea of beauty pageant contestants talking to be pretty pointless. They should all just just up and look pretty. Maybe instead of talking about their hopes and dreams or whatever the hell they talk about, they can bounce on trampolines and oil wrestle.

[Xessive]

they can bounce on trampolines and oil wrestle.

Ah, the good ol' days of The Man Show

I think Que is on the money. This crap is over-sensationalized. Trivial crap becomes a spectacle in the media circus. The sad part is the majority of the population buys into it. The minorities, as usual, have to suffer the indignation. It's a natural process: majority rules. It just sucks that the majority these days seem to be ass hats.

[Cobra951]

The majority may rule in this so-called democracy, but that majority is comprised of a diverse mix.  What applies here, though is a completely different take on minorities and majorities.  From an individual and group perspective, there is a politically correct pecking order, with black women at the top and white men at the bottom.  All other groups fall somewhere in between, with females having the higher standing in each category.  Nothing a black woman says can be indicted or ridiculed by anyone other than another black woman.  Anything a white man says can be indicted and ridiculed by anyone.  (I suppose a black lesbian has even greater clout.)

Calling this judge a prick in the media would quickly buy any straight man no end of trouble with the gay and lesbian hordes.  Truth has nothing to do with it, only politics.

[Xessive]

Truth has nothing to do with it, only politics.

Precisely the ass-hattery I'm talking about. It's pure, uncut bullcrap.

[W7RE]

Speaking of dumb shit, I guess there's some kind of vicious fighting going on between pro-vaccine people and anti-vaccine people? Soem chick from highschool who friended me on facebook won't shut up about her "work in the pro-vaccine field". Yesterday she was bitching about Jenny McCarthy's anti-vaccine propaganda. 3 hours later she posts that Jenny McCarthy unjustly blocked her on Twitter.

YOU'RE BOTH FUCKING STUPID.

Ok maybe there's a worthy issue buried in there somewhere, but I can't help but just see a lame ass soccer mom harassing a braindead celebrity activist. They should both die.

[nickclone]

Speaking of dumb shit, I guess there's some kind of vicious fighting going on between pro-vaccine people and anti-vaccine people? Soem chick from highschool who friended me on facebook won't shut up about her "work in the pro-vaccine field". Yesterday she was bitching about Jenny McCarthy's anti-vaccine propaganda. 3 hours later she posts that Jenny McCarthy unjustly blocked her on Twitter.

YOU'RE BOTH FUCKING STUPID.

Ok maybe there's a worthy issue buried in there somewhere, but I can't help but just see a lame ass soccer mom harassing a braindead celebrity activist. They should both die.

Funny you brought this up: http://www.cracked.com/blog/dont-listen-to-jenny-mccarthy

[idolminds]

You know whats awesome? Polio.

Jenny McCarthy is a nutbag. And so is your friend for arguing over Twitter. Thats somehow worse than regular internet arguments that go nowhere.

[Cools!]

Ok, wtf? That Jenny McCarthy video on the Doctors show thing was crazy. She's nuts.

Edit: I'm watching more of the video, and the arguments don't make any sense. Basically they [the people against the docs] are taking two trends and assuming that there should be a correlation between the two. In this case: Finland has less vaccination and also lower autism, therefor lower vaccination means less autism... WOW!!

Not saying that's not possible, but that's like saying that because there are more guys attending my former College, that means that there are more guys on the planet...

[Xessive]

She's hot. I am turned on by certain forms of activism. This just won't cut it. Stupidity is a major and immediate turn off.

Her side's arguments are like tantrums, unfounded and senseless. I believe that certain vaccinations are a good idea, like Polio and Tetanus, but I'm against over-indulgent vaccination like Flu shots and things that don't seem to make sense; the only way to treat a common cold is have some soup and rest, wtf is with all these intravenous treatments and hallucinogenic over-the-counter drugs.

I've never had a Influenza shot in my life and it's not a problem. I'm not immune to it or anything, it's like having an especially bad cold. I rest, drink a lot of fluids, adjust my diet to have a higher vitamin intake (basically eat a lot of veggies), and in a few days I'm out of the storm. I don't know anyone on this side of the world who has ever needed a Flu shot. I thought it was just in Canada until I realized that USA and the UK do it too, though they're not quite as militant about taking it in the UK.

Coming back to vaccination, it is a preventative measure or a preparation. In most cases prevention is better than a cure (I say "most" because there are some exceptions in which the experience of the ailment is actually beneficial). I think what it comes down to is a matter of trust. Do you really know what you're being injected with? Unless you're the one who developed the serum, not really.

The core of this political struggle is the suspicion that the gov't or gov't employed medical specialists are being deceitful. I understand that paranoia but you can't launch an assault with inconclusive, incoherent data!!

[idolminds]

The flu can be dangerous. It will weaken your immune system and you could develop pneumonia, which can kill you. According to the Center for Disease Control, its the 8th leading cause of death.

[Xessive]

The flu can be dangerous. It will weaken your immune system and you could develop pneumonia, which can kill you. According to the Center for Disease Control, its the 8th leading cause of death.

That's true, if it goes unattended or untreated it can be dangerous. Much like most other illnesses or ailments. I'm just saying the treatment is not necessarily in a government mandated syringe.

You just reminded me of Bernie Mac.. He died of misdiagnosed or mistreated pneumonia.

[Cobra951]

Jim Henson went that direction as well.  I forget exactly what kind of unattended bad cold killed him.

There's a positive correlation between sales of ice cream and violent crime.  No joke.  Therefore, we should ban ice cream.

[Quemaqua]

Lots of people die for lots of stupid reasons, many of them bad medical choices made by doctors.  Drugs kill people all the time, too, either from misuse or because of misdiagnosis or because they complicate something else.  There are legitimate concerns some people have about certain vaccines, and while some people take it too far, that doesn't mean there's nothing to it.

[Cools!]

Well, these nut-cases are forgetting how many lives have already been saved by vaccination. Many of us are alive today because of them, simple as that. Obviously there are risks involved when you introduce something foreign into your body and maybe there's a relationship between vaccination and autism, etc., and the long term effects should be studies. But the point still stands, vaccination is currently saving lives and until they find a better way of doing it, it'll remain in place.

The problem really is that people always want to have something singular to blame. There are just too many variables involved. There's is just no way that there is a direct correlation between vaccination and autism without other variables come into play.

Why don't they just blame God? Singular entity supposedly responsible for everything...

[Pugnate]

I wouldn't call them nutcases. People are just uninformed or something. Sometimes they need reminders. 

[Cools!]

No, I'm talking about Jenny and her "pals". Nut-cases.

[Cobra951]

The problem really is that people always want to have something singular to blame. There are just too many variables involved. There's is just no way that there is a direct correlation between vaccination and autism without other variables come into play.

Correct.  In my ice-cream example, the third variable is obvious.  (Right?)  It's a perfect illustration of why correlations have absolutely nothing to do with causality.  Anyone who thinks that they do show causality is simply ignorant.  Bring in the celebs, and we get ignorance and arrogance at the same time.

[gpw11]

I know a chick who didn't vaccinate her children (actually, I believe she got some.  I asked her why and she said that she wasn't really sure and so she asked on of the head doctors at the chidren's hospital.  He apparently basically said it was a choice someone has to make on their own but he didn't vaccinate his own children.  I don't know anything about it, and there could be risks involved, but I don't really think that guy should be telling people that while on the job working in a public institution.  That's kind of just me though and I really don't know anything about it.

As for Perez Hilton, he's by no means representative of the gay population.  He's like the rest of the internet gay celebrities - caricatures.  His personality and stereotypical actions probably have less to do with the fact that he's actually gay and more to do with the fact that he grew up socially awkward and retarded.  Probably assuming people didn't like him because they knew he was gay and that's why he was 'different'.  So, he took the one thing he had to belong to and embraced it all in, lame ass stereotype and everything.  Balls deep in the only thing that he belonged to because he had to belong to it.   I'd also assume that's why he's so angry and had that little  lecture on how a federal constitution works in the middle of his rant - he just needs to prove himself anyway he can.  It's less of a gay thing, more of a nerd thing. Oh, and he's a fat bitch.

Correct.  In my ice-cream example, the third variable is obvious.  (Right?)  It's a perfect illustration of why correlations have absolutely nothing to do with causality.  Anyone who thinks that they do show causality is simply ignorant.  Bring in the celebs, and we get ignorance and arrogance at the same time.

That's a brilliant example that I've never heard of before.

[WindAndConfusion]

Correct.  In my ice-cream example, the third variable is obvious.  (Right?)  It's a perfect illustration of why correlations have absolutely nothing to do with causality. 

Actually, "ice cream and crime" is a famous thought experiment which conclusively demonstrates that, in certain cases, correlation can prove causation. They teach it in stats classes.

Short version: Ice cream sales and violent crime are correlated. This could mean that ice cream sales cause more crime occur, that crime increases ice cream sales, or that a hidden third variable causes both ice cream sales and crime to increase.

Well, if you were to look at some other variables, you might also notice that a decrease in the heroin supply is also correlated with an increase in crime; but interestingly, when crime rates increase due to changes in the heroin supply, ice cream sales are unaffected. That would effectively disprove the notion that crime causes ice cream sales. Similarly, the fact that birthday parties for six-year-olds are correlated with increased ice cream sales but not increased crime would contradict the claim that ice cream causes crime.

You might also notice a correlation between temperature and both ice cream sales and crime: on hot days, there are more violent crimes and more ice cream sales. Rainfall is also correlated with heat, and interestingly, when there are changes in heat due to rainfall, there are corresponding changes in both crime and ice cream sales; but when there are changes in ice cream sales or crime due to birthdays or heroin, there are no corresponding changes in heat or rainfall. This could be considered scientific proof (but not mathematical proof)* that heat is causally related to both crime and ice cream sales. 
*It's semantics, but it's an important distinction.

[W7RE]

Damn, I really want some ice cream now.





and maybe some heroin.

[Cobra951]

Yeah, the heat is the (obvious) 3rd variable, which (also obviously) is the real cause of increased ice cream sales and passion-fueled violence.  The point is that a correlation in a vacuum is meaningless.  More is needed to establish that one thing causes another.

[Xessive]

This is what inevitably leads to people becomimg more superstitious and yelling crap like "Oh Gods, why have you cast this bad omen on us?!" Eventually ice-cream will be stigmatized and the arrival of the ice-cream truck will be the harbinger of dark days ahead.

Obviously proper studies need to be conducted to see the causality, sadly there are enough ignorant people out there to ignore logic and turn anything into a terrible warning from the Gods.

[idolminds]

Xessives post totally reminded me of Twisted Metal.

[wizall]

Xessives post totally reminded me of Twisted Metal.

Goddamn Sweet Tooth and his fucking manic cackle.