Listen, I get what you're trying to say. But that doesnt change the fact she's ignorant for not personally wanting equal rights for all people becasue of her religion or ''the way she's raised.''

It just sickens me.

See, this is the real problem.

It is not the fact that she voiced her opinion that got her into trouble. It is perfectly fine for her to say that her values about marriage should be between a man and a woman, or in her words "opposite marriage." It is also fine that she doesn't want to offend anybody as well. What was not fine was when she said "that is how marriage SHOULD be."

See, I'm also against gay people from "marrying." What I am not against is gay people from being together. The problem from her statement was that people can and will infer that she is inflicting HER own opinion on how OTHER people should live their lives. As a Miss America contestant, she needed to give an answer that will please everybody and nobody at the same time, especially in this kind of question.

A better answer would have been "I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman (if this is her opinion), but I also believe that gay couples should be allowed together. Religion already forbids gay people from existing in this specific religion, let alone marry, but it also forbids people from being harsh and demeaning towards anybody, including homosexuals. Gay couples 'marrying' demeans the meaning and occasion of marriage as just 'another definition of being together' for other religious, heterosexuals who are going to marry or already married. If there is another religion that is created for gay couples and allows them to marry, then should be allowed to. But otherwise, allowing them to marry while demeaning the sanctimony of other marriages shouldn't be allowed."

Oh and technically, homosexuals are a danger to humanity. Not sociologically, but evolutionary-wise. If there are more and more homosexuals, there are less and less new babies made. How will humanity survive then?

@ WessleWoggle's "There's no rational basis for why gays shouldn't be allowed to get married, except ignorant opinions based on cultural or religious values."

I've been giving this a lot of thought and I wonder as to why said cultural demographic fiercely opposes it. We may never know why they do it and for what reasons, but it clearly seems that many of them, not all of them, but a considerable size of the demographic have 'invested' a whole lot of pride in the issue.

um dude, only like ~5% of the population is gay, not exactly threatening. Seeing how it isnt a choice, I don't see that percentage increasing.

All I can say is that I sense a good deal of hypocrisy :/

I wasn't talking about this situation. He made a general statement, I made a general statement.

But in reference to this situation, I would not think ill of her opinion, but she said in "my country". gay marriage should be between a man and a woman. She should have left that out, and just said the "in my family" part.

Cool story bro, how about actually contributing to the thread instead of pointing fingers.

Humanity is well past the survival stage, now we're flourishing.

If anything there should be more homosexuals so we can stop overpopulating the earth.

I really enjoyed reading your excellent post. You picked up something I didn't notice. Her: "that is how marriage SHOULD be." Kudos to you.

Just keep in mind that the average population growth rate for the world is 1.17%.
A certain percentage of gays poses no real threat. I'm not your typical environmentalist, but I am aware of that a gradual lowering of the planet's total population is not a global disadvantage. Quite on the contrary.

Actually she said it was great you could choose between straight and gay marriage even though she didn't agree with it.  So "Make it legal even though i don't think people should do it."