Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!
An 'urgency': Sensing threats to institutions of society, church leaders make declaration 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Dethroned
Miss California Carrie Prejean lost her crown yesterday after California pageant officials fired her because of breach of contract issues. Although pageant owner Donald Trump had defended the beauty queen a month ago when she faced criticism for racy photos and anti-gay marriage comments, this time he sided with pageant officials: “I told Carrie she needed to get back to work and honor her contract with the Miss California USA Organization and I gave her the opportunity to do so. Unfortunately it just doesn’t look like it is going to happen.”
UPDATE: Prejean’s attorney, Charles Limandri, had the following to say about the matter:
“This is all kind of a big shock… It is not true that she has not been cooperating. Something is going on; the truth is not being told. I don’t understand where this is coming from, or why,” Limandri said in a statement to the LA Times. “For people to say that she breached her contract, that she is not doing speaking engagements is false. She did one last Sunday in Las Vegas and it went really well… No one said to her, ‘Carrie, you are not doing what we want you to do.’”
back to top57 Comments to “Dethroned”
I hope she will be able to keep her new breasts. It would be a shame if she had to give those back.
Report comment to moderator
Travis makes an ecellent point. However, I don’t know why she should stop with two. If she looks so great with ersatz breasts, wouldn’t she look even more delightful with four breasts?
(For that matter, Trump would look even better with at least two breasts.)
Can’t wait until Victoria comes along and tells us what to think about this.
Report comment to moderator
And these same men posting above think they’re what? Modern? Intelligent?
They sound crass to me, and they forget where they are. Let’s hope the conversation becomes a tad more elevated when the Christian men start to post.
With respect to the legal issues, if she was willing to perform the contract and they were not, she has a case and should sue. If not, then Trump did the right thing.
Report comment to moderator
[yawning]
WhoooooOOOOOOO CARES …
On the other hand, maybe she’ll go away now. “Your fifteen minutes is up … next, please … “
Report comment to moderator
There is a larger issue than beauty pageants, if that’s what you’re thinking, Frank. I don’t care one bit about beauty pageants, and when I heard this on the news, the guy sitting with the successor just went on and on about how we have to deal with beauty. It was nauseating.
But if this girl lost her position because of the honest answer she gave to the question about homosexuals, then that’s a free speech issue and a free exercise issue, and you should care about that as much as we care about gun rights.
Report comment to moderator
NJL, on one level I agree with you. But unless there is significant govtal control oversight of the Trump pageant, I fail to see the 1st amendment issue. The pageant is a voluntary and private organization. If Prejean’s participation was contingent on her upholding any type of signed contract which she then violated, well what then? Perhaps you are unlike me privy to the terms and conditions of the pledge Prejean and all contestants signed.
As it is now, I suspect lecture circuit fees and perhaps a book deal will more than assuage Carrie for her loss.
Report comment to moderator
You are right about government control, Sawgunner. It’s not a first amendment claim in that sense, but the idea that a person loses a job because she spoke honestly about a controversial issue is offensive to me. That’s free speech to me, and if she was willing to perform the contract, she should be compensated for her loss whether or not she makes up for it on the lecture circuit. I don’t know what’s in the contract, but if she can’t say what she said and loses the deal because of it, well, maybe they shouldn’t have been allowed to ask the question in the first place. If she wasn’t willing to perform the contract, then she should lose. I don’t think she should be fired because her lawyer works with pro-one man one woman marriage groups either.
I think the case should be litigated if she was willing to perform. That way we’ll find out.
Report comment to moderator
And thank you, Sawgunner, for not making a crass remark about her. I appreciate it.
Report comment to moderator
You, too, Frank.
Report comment to moderator
Breasts matter. It’s a beauty pageant. A nice pair will increase your chance of winning. That’s why the pageant funded her augmentation, and that’s why she opted to get the procedure done. Breasts matter.
I’m generally concerned about her well being. I hope that her contract allows her to retain the saline bags. It would be a shame to strip her of her title *and* her 36Cs. Let’s hope Mr. Trump does the right thing here.
Report comment to moderator
This is a sad ending to a sad story, the problem is the person who cause this issue walks away as the hero (the gay judge) the person who is the vitcim walks away as the bad guy.
Report comment to moderator
Funny how NJLawyer thinks free speech is so important but would like to control which questions interviewers are “allowed” to ask.
Although I agree with the larger point. Trump says she was fired for not fulfilling her contractual obligations, which should be fairly easy to show: either she was making her obligatory appearances or she wasn’t.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner
the question is were they looking for a reason to fire her? Did they all try to work together? As for the gay judge question and the answer, it has now destroy any honest answer from the ladies. These ladies for now on will not be answering question honestly, they are going to answer the question the way the judges want them to be answer. Why? First off because they want to win, second for fear that they too will be targeted by special interest groups.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy, I admire Prejean. I’m not apologetic about likening her to another pageant contestant (Esther or Hadassah) who was placed where she was at the time she was for a greater purpose.
You are 100% correct. The contestants will probably be timid. If I were one I think I’d look off stage and even say aloud: “I’m not sure if my legal counsel will let me answer that question”. This will have the always dreaded by libs “chilling effect”. But at the same time, maybe Trump or whoever selects judges will be a little more zealous in vetting the judge panel. If a question is too controversial to honestly answer its probably too controversial to be asked in the first place.
For that reason I too resent Perez Hilton being lionized and Prejean being damned. I guess its like cross examination; you never ask a question to which you don’t already know the answer.
Did they need a reason to “fire” her? Some of us live in “terminate at will” states; which are the labor relations equivalent of “no fault divorce” states: divorce or fire for any reason or no reason. In such jurisdictions you serve in any job at the sufferance of whoever hired you. I don’t know Calif. labor law but it seems now as if Prejean’s case is morphing into that instead of any 1st amendment issue
Report comment to moderator
Bismarck remarked that most of us are better off not knowing how sausages or laws are made. I’d add to his list most of us are better off not knowing all the various “tricks of the trade” for pageant contestants: vaseline to make teeth shiny, glue to keep swimsuit bottoms from riding up and duct tape to create and maintain the cleavage image.
That Prejean could leap into that milieu is somewhat puzzling but again, I hope we will always have Christians making a witness from 30th floor boardrooms all the way down to the sewer inspectors.
Report comment to moderator
No, SteveG, I am saying that if you ask that sort of question, if she gives a decent, clean answer — her opinion, which she is entitled to — she shouldn’t suffer by losing her job because of political correctness. If he can ask the question, he has to accept the answer, too. The homosexual did not and made a stink, and if that’s what this is about, he — and you — are the ones controlling speech. Sorry you couldn’t figure that out.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer
I am trying to understand your posting, “The homosexual did not and made a stink, and if that’s what this is about, he — and you — are the ones controlling speech.”
What do you mean about controlling speech? An how is that happen here?
Report comment to moderator
If any of you saw the press conference held by the Ms. California organizers just before Trump decided not to fire her, you would know that they where livid about Prejean’s inability to live up to her contractual obligations. They blamed anti gay marriage activists for hijacking Miss Prejean for their own political purposes. Pageant organizers said “Up to now, it’s been very difficult to get in touch with her,” and “She doesn’t answer her phone. Her pastor does.” They also heaped scorn on the National Organization for Marriage, saying “Shame for taking this young woman and exploiting her to further your own agenda.”
I suspect that the only reason Trump didn’t fire her then is because he didn’t want to take flack from those happy to se Prejean exploited for their own political purposes.
Report comment to moderator
Ms. Prejean will be fine. I see “Faux News Anchor” in her future (provided she doesn’t have to give back the two things that made her famous). In any event, she’s a Conservative Christian Idol now and will not lack for things to do. There will be tours, a book deal, a movie, and Christian television and radio. She’ll make enough money to buy an even bigger set of the things that made her famous.
Report comment to moderator
Trump generously gave Prejean another chance to do her job, and it didn’t work out. So what. The new Ms. California is way hotter anyway, and she’s real. I’ve never been a fan of fake breasts.
Report comment to moderator
I’d ask Steve what was the point of interjecting such a question—as Hilton asked Prejean—into a beauty pagant in the first place? Since when did these hold-over skin shows of the past become an intellectually oriented, televised “SAT” requiring the contestants to display acumen beyond the usual “What will you do for the little animals” inquiries? Everyone knows why these shows exist and have known ever since Bert Parks first decided he could sing.
Hilton knew he was dropping a politically divisive bomb by asking such a question and then classlessly showed all his cards when she deftly kicked it back into his lap. Oh, Boo Hoo.
If Trump is seeking some unknown level of decorum in this production, it would seem that filtering such hot-button questions coming from the judges would be a more effective means to achieve his goals. If his goal is to just make headlines, as he has—regardless of the consequences for the people involved—that would be much more “Donaldesque” IMO.
As for why she was fired, I don’t think we’re even close to hearing the real reason and think all this is just more advertising to keep the topic on the table. Trump is no fool and a fully accomplished maestro on the pop culture fiddle.
Report comment to moderator
Miss California Carrie Prejean lost her crown on Wednesday and Thursday morning pageant executive Keith Lewis told CBS’s ‘The Early Show’ how she was difficult to work with and skipped “tens and tens” of appearances.
“It was a combative relationship. It was just very difficult for us,” Lewis told Julie Chen. “We tried to meet halfway, and it was obvious that wasn’t going to happen.”
He said they now only speak through their attorneys.
Report comment to moderator
ROND: I agree it was a stupid and out-of-place question.
Report comment to moderator
(sent too fast)
But I do respect people’s right to make fools of themselves.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy, SteveG stated in post 12: “Funny how NJLawyer thinks free speech is so important but would like to control which questions interviewers are “allowed” to ask.
The person who asked the question went ape over the answer she gave for days! And he expected everyone to condemn the woman. She gave a “no offense meant” answer, and he carried on for days. The left, if it had its druthers, would pound on people who disagree with them until they submit. I’m tired of saying what is “politically correct” to appease them.
If his question was not out of line, neither was her answer. He just didn’t like it. That should not be cause for her to lose her position, considering more than 40 states are against homosexual marriage.
Report comment to moderator
Moral of the story:
Don’t get involved in a Donald Trump enterprise, especially if you’re a woman. He treats women like property to be discarded when he’s done with them.
Report comment to moderator
Of course, Ms. Prejean will be “fine.” But that’s not the point. She voiced an opinion in answer to a question, and if that answer has caused her to lose her crown, she has been cheated and is entitled to damages.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer – Thank youu
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer – “Of course, Ms. Prejean will be “fine.” But that’s not the point. She voiced an opinion in answer to a question, and if that answer has caused her to lose her crown, she has been cheated and is entitled to damages”
How hard would it to prove that she lost her crown because of her answer?
Report comment to moderator
The crown is not worth a fraction of what her integrity is worth and all Trump can take away is the crown.
Report comment to moderator
There you have it. Joel has proclaimed that Ms. Prejean may keep the saline bags!
Report comment to moderator
Report comment to moderator
NJL,
Why do you repeatedly insist that Prejean’s answer caused her to lose her crown? If anything it was pressure from conservatives to act as the spokesmodel for opposite marriage that caused her to lose her crown. As I pointed out earlier, at one point, her pastor was screening her calls. This poor girl was taken advantage of to the point she was to distracted from fulfilling her obligations.
Considering that Donald Trump gave her a second chance, I can’t help but wonder if she intentionally continued to violate her contract because more fame an money was to be had as a rightwing martyr.
Report comment to moderator
1. kwatson 06.11.09 AT 3:01 PM
NJL,
Why do you repeatedly insist that Prejean’s answer caused her to lose her crown? If anything it was pressure from conservatives to act as the spokesmodel for opposite marriage that caused her to lose her crown. As I pointed out earlier, at one point, her pastor was screening her calls. This poor girl was taken advantage of to the point she was to distracted from fulfilling her obligations.
Considering that Donald Trump gave her a second chance, I can’t help but wonder if she intentionally continued to violate her contract because more fame an money was to be had as a rightwing martyr.
Sorry, she did not get any pressure from the conservatives to act as the spokes model for real marriages. In an interview on Focus on the Family, she mention that she asked her Pastor for help in dealing with all the calls. Her, Pastor was someone who dealt with the media before.
The only pressure was coming from people like the Gay Judge who wanted to destroy her life.
Report comment to moderator
Who is this “Gay Judge” you keep mentioning?
Report comment to moderator
BY SteveG 06.11.09 AT 3:17 PM
Who is this “Gay Judge” you keep mentioning?
His name is Paris Hilton, he is the man who asked the question. The nexts day after she answer the question he attacked on his blog and any show that permitted him on.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know that her answer cost her the crown! That’s the issue. If she was willing to perform the contract, and now she’s being fired because they claim she wasn’t, someone somewhere ain’t a tellin’ the truth — and that should be determined in a court of law. If she’s telling the truth, she has a case and should seek damages.
On the Whirled Views thread, I think it was KBells who mentioned that one has to say certain things or act in a certain way today in our society or we put ourselves at risk. That’s a bad thing to happen — and it is the liberals who are doing it.
Report comment to moderator
And if more fame and money came from doing the other, non-beauty queen stuff, she could always walk away from the beauty pageant. She could have resigned. But that’s not what happened — she was fired, and the truth has not yet been revealed.
Report comment to moderator
NJL
You are right “the truth has not yet been revealed.” – I’m sure it will be in time. This reminds me of the semi-nude photos which she allowed to be taken, and then made an excuse as models wear swim suits and lingerie – not all models take their clothes off nor do they model lingerie.
Most of the work which top models involve themselves even haute couture has some nudity, she had to know that – if that’s the life she chose, so be it – but she wasn’t forthcoming regarding the semi-nude photos, nor did she make an apology for ever having done it, instead she blamed it on being 17 or so.
Yes there is much more to this story, unfortunately!
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy:
Who is this “Gay Judge” you keep mentioning?
His name is Paris Hilton, he is the man who asked the question. The nexts day after she answer the question he attacked on his blog and any show that permitted him on.
Oh, him. His name is Perez Hilton, actually. Paris Hilton is a woman and not involved in this at all.
I admit I did not realize he was a pageant judge. I am aware of him only as a gossip blogger and though he had asked the question as part of his normal obnoxious interviews, not in an official pageant role.
Report comment to moderator
1. SteveG 06.11.09 AT 4:16 PM
Pastor Roy:
Who is this “Gay Judge” you keep mentioning?
His name is Paris Hilton, he is the man who asked the question. The nexts day after she answer the question he attacked on his blog and any show that permitted him on.
Oh, him. His name is Perez Hilton, actually. Paris Hilton is a woman and not involved in this at all.
I admit I did not realize he was a pageant judge. I am aware of him only as a gossip blogger and though he had asked the question as part of his normal obnoxious interviews, not in an official pageant role
I am sorry that I miss spelled his name. I just heard Sean Hannity is go to speak to Carrie Prejean on today’s show.
Steven he bragged on the fact he gave her a zero and cost her the crown. Due to her answer.
Report comment to moderator
Carrie Prejean wore her sash Tuesday night on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show as she explained those topless photos.
“I’m from California. A swimsuit for us is no big deal,” she tells Hannity.
She also discusses that topless shoot with a professional photographer for a surf magazine. Apparently he gave her a vest and a bathing suit bottom. They were on a cliff and it was very “windy.”
“He was sneaking shots … it’s inappropriate.”
____________another excerpt___________
HANNITY: For example, I have no doubt your career is about to skyrocket. Victoria’s Secret is one level. OK? Would you do Victoria’s Secret?
PREJEAN: Ever — you know, beginning modeling, that was my dream.
HANNITY: To do that.
PREJEAN: To do Victoria’s Secret.
HANNITY: OK.
PREJEAN: Whether it’s the pink line, which is a less more revealing or, you know, to be a Victoria’s Secret angel. I think that would be amazing.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedishrag/2009/05/carrie-prejean-tells-sean-hannity-she-wont-pose-for-playboy-yeah-right.html
Report comment to moderator
Miss California Carrie Prejean just told Sean Hanity that she found out that she was fired by the media not by anyone from Miss California. She only turned down two events, one was reality show I am Star get me out of here and have a picture laid out for playboy.
Report comment to moderator
Miss California Carrie Prejean just say they wanted her to attend a pro-gay marriage event.
Report comment to moderator
Pastor Roy
Do you have a link for your statement in post #43 amd #44?
Report comment to moderator
Victoria 06.11.09 AT 5:58 PM
Pastor Roy
Do you have a link for your statement in post #43 amd #44
I just listen to it on the radio.
Report comment to moderator
Miss California Carrie Prejean just told Sean Hanity that she found out that she was fired by the media not by anyone from Miss California.
What does that mean? Donald Trump fired her. She can’t be “fired by the media.”
If she means that she was fired because of a negative public image, then she should be able to prove that, should she care to pursue it. I have no particular respect for Donald Trump and I think it’s entirely within his character to have fired for that reason, but it’s also possible his version is the true one.
I suppose if she pursues it the truth will come out, and if she doesn’t we’ll be left to guess.
Report comment to moderator
No Steve,
She meant she didnt know till the media called her to ask questions about it.
Not that she was fired by the media, but that she didnt know she was fired until the media called her. Nobody from the organization called to tell her.
Btw, I also heard on the radio that she had recently turned down a shoot in playboy, which apparently was presented by the organization. However, I think they were supposed to foward every offer to her. Seems odd they would foward such an offer though considering their policy against nudity…
For the record, wanting to be a VS model doesnt seem so bad considering the magazine and clothing is meant for women…then again maybe that causes more lesbians to stumble.
I dont personally agree with a christian girl not being relatively modest about her clothing. It does grey her witness a bit, and maybe someday she’ll realize how that affects even christian men, whether intentionally or not.
Report comment to moderator
I owe two mea culpas here:
NJLawyer: When I made my comment about you wanting to control what questions can be asked, I thought that Perez Hilton had asked that question as an interviewer. Until this thread, I had no idea he was serving as a pageant judge (I do not normally pay any attention at all to beauty pageants.)
Of course someone asking questions as part of such a selection process should be under the supervision of the event organizers and the questions selected based on which ones contribute to uncovering whatever qualities they are looking for in the winner.
Thorn: She meant she didnt know till the media called her to ask questions about it.
Duh. Wow, I read Pastor Roy’s comment really wrongly. My bad.
Report comment to moderator
Well Pastor Roy coulda used better grammar, I can see how it coulda been read that way
Report comment to moderator
American popular (media-driven) culture is crass, hypocritical and hateful in my opinion. Perhaps the best thing for us all is to consider the advice of the apostle Paul:
* “Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we told you, 12so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody.” 1 Thessalonians 4:11 (written early in his missionary career)
Later in life, Paul was still advising “…that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.” (1 Timothy 2:2).
Report comment to moderator
sorry folks about my poor grammar, I am a better speaker then writer.
Report comment to moderator
Part of what I had in mind at post #51 was that if Carrie Prejean is relegated to a private life, this would be for reasons that are unfair, hypocritical and mean-spirited on the part of her critics. But in the bigger picture, a quiet life is not such a bad fate for a Christian.
Report comment to moderator
Ms Prejean also has said that the pageant officials asked her to attend a screening in west hollywood of a pro gay marriage film. And those officials also claimed she had a book contract – something her lawyer disputed. Her lawyer said the officials also wanted to restrict what she could said in the book about what went on….a sticking point in the ongoing negotions.
Look – we all know what went on. The irony is that the new miss California is also a christian. So nothing really has changed.
And the new queen basically told Neil Cavuto that she agrees with Carrie.
But I guess Prejean can thank the radical homosexuals for making her a star that will shine long after the others fade….
Report comment to moderator
Victoria – I wasn’t clear, so you have a point. I was making the larger point that we all know the reason why she got in trouble with the paegant officials, and why she had to go. The dust has already settled on that.
Take care
Report comment to moderator
From my point of view, the problem with this whole affair was not so much the question that Perez Hilton asked, but his reaction to the answer. He became incensed that she dared to be honest to her faith and had the courage to voice disagreement with “gay marriage” and then Hilton proceeded to:
1. Violate the ethics of his position as a judge, that is, to judge impartially on the basis of the contest criteria. Political views are in no way part of the criteria of such a contest. (The questions should have been vetted by impartial staff in the first place, with political questions eliminated from the list of authorized questions.) In his reaction, Hilton was bigoted and dishonest to his obligations as an impartial judge according to contest criteria. He should have been removed from his position and publicly reprimanded.
2. His second reaction was to take to the airwaves and viciously attack her with obscenities while justifying his own hateful bigotry. This was grossly ugly and indecent, yet typical of homosexual reaction to opposing points of view.
Prejean’s physical attributes and how she did or did not attain them are entirely irrelevant to the main points regarding Perez Hilton and his obscene, unethical, hateful behavior.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!