April 30th, 2009
02:09 PM ET
6 years ago

Group's new ad features beauty queen, celebrity blogger

Carrie Prejean and Perez Hilton are prominently featured in a new ad from the National Organization for Marriage.
Carrie Prejean and Perez Hilton are prominently featured in a new ad from the National Organization for Marriage.

WASHINGTON (CNN) – The recent dust-up between a celebrity blogger and a California beauty queen is at the center of a new ad from a group that opposes same-sex marriage.

The new ad, titled "No Offense," spotlights the controversy that erupted during the Miss USA pageant earlier this month when Miss California Carrie Prejean said she did not believe in same-sex marriage in response to a question from blogger Perez Hilton, who is gay.

"Gay marriage activists attack people for supporting marriage because they don't want to debate the consequences of same-sex marriage," the ad says. "They want to silence opposition."

The spot is the second ad in a $1.5 million campaign recently launched by the National Organization for Marriage.

"Our mission is to protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it," the group's executive director Brian Brown said Tuesday. "We want to highlight the very real effects on our liberties and especially on religious organizations, businesses, and individuals."

Brown also said Tuesday that the group is concerned that people of faith who oppose same-sex marriage are being cast as bigots in much the same that people who opposed racial integration were during the civil rights movements of the 1950's and 1960's.

During the pageant, Hilton asked Prejean about same-sex marriage. "I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman," Prejean said in response to the blogger, who was one of the pageant's judges. "No offense to anybody out there," Prejean added, "but that's how I was raised and that's how I think that it should be."

Prejean took second place in the pageant and some observers believe her answer cost her the crown.

She is set to join Brown at a press conference Thursday afternoon in Washington for the formal release of the new ad.

In an anticipation of the press conference, the producers and co-executive directors of the Miss California USA pageant issued a statement critical of Prejean's involvement with the National Organization for Marriage. "In the entire history of Miss USA, no reigning title holder has so readily committed her face and voice to a more devisive [sic] or polarizing issue," the statement says. "We are deeply saddened Carrie Prejean has forgotten her platform of the Special Olympics, her committment [sic] to all Californians, and solidified her legacy as one that goes beyond the rights to voice her beliefs and instead reveals her opportunistic Agenda."


Filed under: Popular Posts • Same-sex marriage
soundoff (309 Responses)
  1. Steve Vaught

    When did Perez Hilton become a moral compass?

    April 30, 2009 11:13 am at 11:13 am |
  2. Bill

    Let's see. We have all manner of problems facing humanity, including hunger and disease, over one billion humans subsisting on less than one dollar per day, and the followers of "Jesus", that good and righteous man from 2,000 years ago, have decided the best use of $1.5 million is to put this poor woman in an infomercial, which will certainly become a camp classic parody? I'm always amazed.

    April 30, 2009 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  3. David Newport, OR

    the new "face" of the GOP...join her with "Joe the plumber" and Sarah Palin...keep up the good work Republicans. You are giving the democrats full power for the next twenty years simply by your "choice" in who "represents" your party.

    April 30, 2009 11:14 am at 11:14 am |
  4. Heck no

    Is it really surprising that 'the popular pretty girl' wants to dump on the gays?
    I don't think we should be taking moral cues from the pagent world. Why do these things even exist?

    April 30, 2009 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  5. stop

    i am glad that she said what she said. Regardless of prop 8 and @#@$% legislation, i think most of us disagree with her, and it has become more clear since she spoke. She has the right to her opinion. FIne. But please let us not focus all our attention on this single interaction between 2 celebrities. This issue is real, and this event only clouds the issue for most people. Hating her only makes her a martyr for a narrow-minded movement.

    April 30, 2009 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  6. Al-NY,NY

    You're entitled to your opinion sister. Now shut up and mind you own business

    April 30, 2009 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  7. David in Houston

    "Brown said Tuesday that the group is concerned that people of faith who oppose same-sex marriage are being cast as bigots in much the same that people who opposed racial integration were during the civil rights movements of the 1950's and 1960's."

    _______

    Hey, if the shoe fits...

    April 30, 2009 11:16 am at 11:16 am |
  8. Jeff in Virginia

    The real people to blame here are Prejean's parents.

    Shame on them for teaching their daughter that it's OK to hate if you can base it on religion or morality. There is never an excuse to hate.

    April 30, 2009 11:16 am at 11:16 am |
  9. Larry from RI

    The biggest threat to heterosexual marriage is divorce – not gay marriage.

    Why aren't these groups advocating making divorce illegal?
    Horn dogs like Rudy Gulianni, John McCain and Newt Gingrich, who can't seem to "keep it in their pants", go through wives like they change their socks.

    I guess infidelity is OK if you are a GOP party leader? Heck, Newt was having his own illicit affair at the very same time he was persecuting Bill Clinton over the Lewinski scandal.
    The irony is that Bill is still married while that randy as a goat, good ole' boy Newt is on wife number three!

    What a bunch of ditto head hypocrites!

    April 30, 2009 11:16 am at 11:16 am |
  10. Dennis White

    Perez Hilton should be banned from judging anything! He used the opportunity of his vote to further his own interests, and he should be penalized accordingly...If fact, there should be a revote called for Carrie Prejean!!

    April 30, 2009 11:16 am at 11:16 am |
  11. FR

    She place high because of her stance on gay rights. She placed second because she is an idiot. "Opposite marriage"???? She's marginally mentally retarded when she grasps for the words to use and comes up with "opposite marriage"....it was pretty bad.

    April 30, 2009 11:17 am at 11:17 am |
  12. Mike Simons

    ".....Brown also said Tuesday that the group is concerned that people of faith who oppose same-sex marriage are being cast as bigots in much the same that people who opposed racial integration were during the civil rights movements of the 1950's and 1960's...."

    And the point is...?

    They *were* bigots, and ignorant.... no?

    April 30, 2009 11:17 am at 11:17 am |
  13. Ken

    Carrie, I thank you for standing up for your right to voice your honest openion on this subject, as I beleive anyone who's doesn't say one thing when they're in one group of people and something else when they're in a different croud of folks. God will truely bless you for your faithfullness in spreading what he dictates in His word. You'll go alot farther in life than what winning that padget may have helped you with. Love you girl!!

    April 30, 2009 11:17 am at 11:17 am |
  14. artemisios

    Of course, she has every right in this free country to say whatever she wants. But since she speaks with the full authority and excellent wisdom of a beauty pageant contestant, I have every right to ignore her.

    April 30, 2009 11:18 am at 11:18 am |
  15. Kili

    "Gay marriage activists attack people for supporting marriage because they don't want to debate the consequences of same-sex marriage,"

    And those "consequences" would be what.... exactly? Treating homosexuals as if they were also homosapiens? Oh the HORRRORRRR! The only "consequences" I see are that those who are denied basic rights regarding their life partners could then legally get those rights.

    And for the posters who believe that the legal contract of marriage is all about reproduction... should we then ban the infertil from marrying as well? Marriage is more than just reproduction, it's also about declaring that you're building your lives together, the legal rights spouses get and the other benefits that have come to be accrued to those who are "married". We don't get to limit rights to only one segment of society simply because we don't agree with who they love... as long as it's about 2 consenting adults, it's their own business, not that of the rest of us.

    Why the heck is government in the business of regulating a religious institution in the first place?

    April 30, 2009 11:18 am at 11:18 am |
  16. Gloria

    I personally think marriage is a overrated form of gender slavery. What the government should do is abolish these stupid laws that say people can only get the same benefits if they are "normal"... A family is a family no matter what the makeup is and its a shame that people in same sex relationships are still being ostracized not only when it comes to receiving the same benefits as the "normals" but when it comes to adoption and other "normal" things. As for that beauty queen (not Perez Hilton) first of all she lost not because of her obvious dislike of same sex marriage, but because of the fact that she is not from this country (she stated as much when she flubbed her "I don't like homo's" answer, no offense to anyone). People are people and if they happen to love and respect each other and are the same sex that's so much better than whats going on in the rest of the world. I could have sworn the Bible said "judge lest not you be judged...." in other words, God is the only entity that can make a right or wrong judgment, not man and definitely not what man writes for others to believe. (I know, a contradiction) .

    April 30, 2009 11:18 am at 11:18 am |
  17. John

    If conservative groups really want to support the institution of marriage, they should do something about the current situation: ban divorce. Oops! Too many Christian conservatives who are so concerned about preserving marriage have forgotten that Jesus said that divorces were banned!

    It seems that conservatives only want to pluck out the mote in another's eye without removing the beam from their own, first.

    April 30, 2009 11:19 am at 11:19 am |
  18. MarkInPDX

    Clearly, no one has kept Carrie Prejean from stating her opinion. Those of you who say she is being stifled are wrong. Stating opposition to her ridiculous views is simply expressing an opposing opinion. What is true is that stating your opinions may have consequences. In this case, she likely lost her crown because of her opinions. But that's the point of asking the question... to get a read on something that was important to at least one of the judges and thereby helping to narrow down the field to a final winner.

    April 30, 2009 11:19 am at 11:19 am |
  19. Rip

    If Perez Hilton wants to have the same rights...he should question why males (not men) aren't allowed to be in the pageant. Then he could wear his tiara in public!

    April 30, 2009 11:19 am at 11:19 am |
  20. Will

    WHAT consequences?

    April 30, 2009 11:20 am at 11:20 am |
  21. Manny BLUM, Bernalillo

    It is inadmissible that an women hating indivdual, whose attitude is a model of all the wrongs people impute to gays, has the power to decide a women beauty competition.

    Gays represent about 2% of the population, but a high
    percentage of the Hollywood crowd. Why the other 98% allow these 2% to push there agenda down our throat?

    April 30, 2009 11:20 am at 11:20 am |
  22. JPM

    After losing the battle against homosexuality, the campaign against gay marriage is simply a spiteful response trying to make the lives of same sex couples more difficult.

    If you have a religious issue with homosexuality, I would think you would push for its criminalization. Or perhaps protest at gay clubs/bars, adult book stores with gay content, and same sex commitment ceremonies. Instead, the conservatives oppose the a civil contract for same sex couples that guarantees property and medical rights. I assure you, your God is shaking his head in embarassment at your futile actions.

    April 30, 2009 11:20 am at 11:20 am |
  23. Chris Mathews

    What a sick organization! A group that tries to deny someone their equal rights is like a modern day Hitler Regime. (without the mass murdering, of course)

    April 30, 2009 11:21 am at 11:21 am |
  24. Chris in Vermont -- Yes, THAT Vermont

    I wholeheartedly support gay marriage, but this entire situation has been completely unfair to Ms. Prejean. Hilton asked her a question, and rather than spin a response or give a politician's no-answer answer - something this beauty pageant contestant probably couldn't pull off, anyway - she gave an honest if unpopular answer. Hilton, predictably, sneered at her response (should we have expected a wide smile and a standing ovation from this particular "judge" if she'd given what he would consider the "right" answer?) and ripped her to shreds in his blog the next day.

    What the heck is a judge doing asking a Miss USA contestant about gay marriage in the first place? (Why not ask her about global economic policy, while you're at it?) Secondly, why was Perez Hilton there in the first place? Matt Drudge wasn't available? Clearly, this was going to be his Big Question for SOMEONE in the contest, and Prejean was the unlucky target.

    Look, I dont think this whole "working with the right-wing loonies" thing is the smartest move for her, but I don't blame her, either. She didn't choose to become an anti-gay marriage spokesperson. Perez Hilton, looking for publicity for himself (as always), thrust her into that role.

    April 30, 2009 11:21 am at 11:21 am |
  25. Drew in PDX

    Whatever!!! If the religious faiths want to preserve marraige for a man and a woman, let them... BUT, then lets get the goverment to adopt a seperate partner union system that benefits of relationships of all types. I just can't comprehend why our counrty can't embrace the seperation of church and state, it is one of our guiding principles for cryin out loud!
    If religious faiths don't want same sex couples to marry, I wouldn't want to be a part of that system anyway, but that doesn't mean that I should expect to be treated as a second class citizen, be denied the rights from my hetero bretheren, because the only institution for recognizing partnerships is founded from religions that not all of our society subscribes to.

    April 30, 2009 11:22 am at 11:22 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13