Submitted by Virilene (not verified) on May 20, 2009 - 13:09.
You pose the question whether this is a "free speech" issue, and whether Prejean shouldn't have the right to express her religious opinion. The answer is that yes, she has a right both to hold her opinion and to speak her opinion, and neither of these rights is being abridged. Prejean does not, however, have a legal 'right' to be Miss U.S.A.
Prejean is not being jailed for holding or stating her (biogted) opinion, nor is she facing any governmentally-imposed legal sanctions or prohibitions for either holding or stating her opinion. She is not facing loss of life, or imprisonment, or loss of any legal rights, such as the right to legally marry the person she loves, or the right to receive pension benefits upon the death of her spouse, or prejudicial tax treatment of receiving insurance benefits through her partner's employer, or the right to adopt---to name just a few of the REAL legal obstacles and economic disparities that gays and lesbians face.
Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are constitutional issues, not social issues. What Prejean is facing is social opprobium for (very, very) publicly stating her bigoted social views, akin, as you correctly point out, to saying that her upbringing does not allow her to support interracial or interfaith marriages. The consequences she is facing are social consequences, not legal ones. Losing a Miss U.S.A title is neither a legal consequence, nor an infringement of her rights.
Editorial comment: Third paragraph, I think you meant to say 'sordid tale' not 'sorted tale'. Or perhaps you meant 'sordid tail' as pertains to Prejean.
You pose the question whether
You pose the question whether this is a "free speech" issue, and whether Prejean shouldn't have the right to express her religious opinion. The answer is that yes, she has a right both to hold her opinion and to speak her opinion, and neither of these rights is being abridged. Prejean does not, however, have a legal 'right' to be Miss U.S.A.
Prejean is not being jailed for holding or stating her (biogted) opinion, nor is she facing any governmentally-imposed legal sanctions or prohibitions for either holding or stating her opinion. She is not facing loss of life, or imprisonment, or loss of any legal rights, such as the right to legally marry the person she loves, or the right to receive pension benefits upon the death of her spouse, or prejudicial tax treatment of receiving insurance benefits through her partner's employer, or the right to adopt---to name just a few of the REAL legal obstacles and economic disparities that gays and lesbians face.
Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are constitutional issues, not social issues. What Prejean is facing is social opprobium for (very, very) publicly stating her bigoted social views, akin, as you correctly point out, to saying that her upbringing does not allow her to support interracial or interfaith marriages. The consequences she is facing are social consequences, not legal ones. Losing a Miss U.S.A title is neither a legal consequence, nor an infringement of her rights.
Editorial comment: Third paragraph, I think you meant to say 'sordid tale' not 'sorted tale'. Or perhaps you meant 'sordid tail' as pertains to Prejean.