Let’s contemplate the true “blondness” of beauty queen Carrie Prejean’s statement, “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage” (“Justice Is Oh So Blond,” Andrea Peyser, May 11).
We actually don’t live in that land, since gay couples are not free to marry in all states.
Imagine applying Prejean’s beliefs to other scenarios: “I shouldn’t have to live next door to black people” or “do business with Jews” or “let a woman earn as much as a man.”
All of those could be explained as “how I was raised,” which is Prejean’s air-headed excuse.
But those statements would also be called discrimination, the very ugly word that those opposing the civil right of gay marriage keep trying to ignore.
Katherine Dieckmann
Manhattan
***
Donald Trump finally got it right.
He saw that Prejean’s freedom of speech and “oh, so beautiful” expression trumped political correctness.
That is real beauty beyond skin deep.
Steve Sacco
Newark, NJ
***
Miss California is the most beautiful Barbie I have ever seen, and she is no bigot.
But she, and many others like her, have shown themselves to be hypocrites, because they want to deny and take away legal rights from others that they take for granted for themselves.
Richard Ziegenfuss
Manhattan
***
Peyser’s column concerning Prejean’s retention of her title as Miss California is based on terribly flawed logic.
Prejean placed herself in a public position and made a public statement on a very heated topic, yet she was shocked and hurt by those who disagreed with her ignorant, bigoted statements about same-sex marriage.
All people have the right to voice their opinion, just as Prejean has the right to voice hers, no matter how ill-conceived and wrong her opinion is.
Ray Slater
Astoria
***
Kudos to Miss USA and kudos to the pageant for not punishing someone for a personal opinion that condones values and a family-oriented upbringing.
Her opinion on this subject is probably shared by about 80 percent of the country, yet she is vilified for stating it.
It’s about time that we treated minority viewpoints, such as those pertaining to the subject of gay marriage, as exactly what they are: minority viewpoints.
C. Malyack
Wayne, NJ
***
Unfortunately, one must endure Peyser’s entire column to arrive at the real problem in the gay-marriage discussion.
To Peyser and other social conservatives and traditionalists, this is simply a difference of opinion and how that opinion is expressed and protected by the First Amendment.
Gay marriage is not about opinions or the freedom of speech.
It is about discrimination, unequal protection under the law, taxation without representation and a tiered social structure.
The gay-marriage discussion should be about these facts, not the distractions and sideshows that are Perez Hilton and Prejean.
Brian Daniel
Manhattan
***
Who would have thought that Donald Trump would be called upon to play Solomon in putting out a phony firestorm over a beauty contestant’s opinion on same-sex marriage, whipped up by the PC police?
The question itself, emotionally charged and fraught with vast religious, sociological and legal implications, was inappropriate for a pageant.
Terminating Miss California for her personal views would have meant sacrificing not simply a crown, but also the crowning glory of freedom of speech itself.
Susan Silver
Manhattan