Carrie Prejean Thinks Being Gay is a Choice

Carrie Prejean
The good news? Carrie Prejean is pro-choice! The bad news? The type of "choice" she's all about is deciding whether or not you're gay.
In response to a question about whether someone can be born gay, Little Miss California responded, "No, I don't think so. I think it's a behavior that develops over time." 
She also referenced President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to justify her belief that marriage is between "a man and a woman".
When will this girl's fifteen minutes of fame expire? I know we're perpetuating the cycle by continuing to write about her, but the fact that she's doing more for the anti-gay marriage movement than the National Organization of (Opposite) Marriage could dream of… it's just sickening.

– Dewitt

9 thoughts on “Carrie Prejean Thinks Being Gay is a Choice

  1. I am NOT going to call this sorry person a 2-bit bleached blonde bimbo who has spent her entire life trying to win beauty pagents. No I will be kind. I will NOT call her names. It is a pity that the media picks up on her stupid comments and that she is too ignorant and should not be interviewed and should only be scorned and laughed at. FUCKING STUPID BITCH!
    I will not call her names. Maybe someone should tell her about the Iraqi gays who have there anuses glued shut or the Iranian gays who are hung. Maybe someone should tell her she is a FUCKING STUPID BITCH but I will NOT call her names. Because FUCKING STUPID BITCH is too kind for this sorry ass cunt!

  2. Ah well, who cares. I mean atleast she says whats she feels, however stupid it may be. I guess I am kind of numb to those comments. I live in Kentucky, and thats tame compared to what people around here think. I have more of a problem with homophobia behind my back. In the words of Copote, “Everyone knows that a faggot, is a gay man who just left the room.” I mean really, who cares what she thinks? In three years this will all pass, and she will be on the cover of “Gag on my big black cock 4” or “Blonde Cum Sluts 8” or better yet “Lesbo Skank Orgy” .

  3. First off, I don’t mean to offend anybody.
    I am attracted to men and choose to have sex with them, as I am sure most manhunt subscribers are. But I probably could have sex with a woman or abstain from sex for the rest of my life, as horrible as the idea is. I choose not to, however.
    I must admit, I’ve never understood why people are offended by the idea that homosexuality is a choice. In many ways, I would almost rather believe that homosexuality IS a choice, and that there’s nothing wrong with choosing it.
    Of course, the definition of “homosexual” is a little tenuous (is it attraction that defines it, or actual sex?), but either way, why is it so offensive for it to be a choice?
    And if you’re defining “homosexual” as “a man who has sex with other men,” rather than “a man who is attracted to other men,” then I would argue that yes, we gays do all choose to have sex with men. You cannot possibly argue that we have no choice whether we have sex or not.

  4. Orientation is attraction, not action. Your whole post is moot, Clint.
    As for the rest of you, damn. For shame. Bitchiness and insults at someone who disagress with you are even less helpful to the equal rights movement than Perez Hilton.

  5. I have to agree with E-man (at least on the latter part). Ugly name-calling is counterproductive in public forums. I’m disgusted by Prejean’s ignorance, but Perez Hilton’s blog comments only gave gay-rights opponents ammunition to fire with.

  6. If you have a negative emotional reaction to this woman – remember – I personally don’t need here approval or acceptance or understanding. Why care? She isn’t Anita Bryant she’s ignorant and that’s OK.
    How many of you are ignorant of the demanding hard high edgy competitional rage in the belly you need for beauty contest?
    She’s a good beauty queen – not a sociologist. Get past it.

  7. As a response to E-man’s post, even though I doubt he’ll ever read this:
    Well, okay, so if you personally would like to define orientation as attraction, that’s fine.
    But first of all, that’s your personal definition and opinion, unless you’re trying to to make a broad generalization about how people define themselves, and I doubt you’d like that.
    Second of all, that STILL doesn’t explain why the belief that homosexuality is a choice is deemed as offensive! If you firmly believe that they’re wrong–why is that offensive? If it were me who believed that orientation is attraction, then they’d just be plain wrong. It’s like somebody believing that ethnicity is a choice–as a minority, I don’t think that would be offensive, rather, their ignorance would just shock me.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.