Reactions to Perez Hilton’s tantrums reveal a cultural movement unhinged by the very behavior it claims to abhor.
Earlier this year, Hilton, the overtly gay celebrity gossip blogger, went on an expletive-laced tirade against Miss USA contestant Carrie Prejean for acknowledging her support for traditional marriage. But it was Prejean, not Hilton, a pageant judge, who was labeled a “disgrace” by the media and asked by pageant sponsors to publicly apologize.
This week, when Hilton used a “gay slur” against Black Eyed Peas singer Will.i.am’s manager, who had just slugged Hilton, it was Hilton, not the manager, who was compelled to apologize. At first, Hilton refused to do so. But he quickly found his voice after feeling the pressure from homosexual activist groups like the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), which condemned Hilton’s use of “vulgar anti-gay slurs that feed a climate of hatred and intolerance toward our community.”
Such is life in an America where smoking and eating fatty foods are fast becoming sins punishable by the state and anti-homosexual rhetoric, real and imaginary, has become the gravest sin of all, punishable under hate crimes statutes.
Even Hilton thinks anti-homosexual language is beyond the pale. “I chose the most hurtful word I know to hurl at him,” Hilton explained on his popular blog.
Actually, according to the cultural Left, “I support traditional marriage” seems to have become the most hateful thing you can say.
Consider Hilton, who later apologized to Prejean only to retract the apology a day later, explaining with a laugh, “I was thinking the c-word and I didn’t say it.” Those comments by Hilton prompted no outrage in the media.
Instead, the outrage was directed at Prejean. “You need to apologize to the gay community,” was what pageant officials allegedly told her after she reluctantly “outed” herself as a supporter of normal marriage. “You need to not talk about your faith. This has everything to do with you representing California and saving the brand.”
No matter that Prejean was representing California, majorities of whose voters have twice voted to enshrine in their constitution the exact belief Prejean articulated on stage.
The real apology needed to come from homosexual activists who, immediately after more than six million Californians voted last November to uphold the traditional definition of marriage, participated in riot-like protests across the nation.
Conservative churches were picketed and vandalized, and church services were disrupted. Envelopes containing white powder were sent to several Mormon temples. And a postcard sent to the homes and businesses of many financial donors of Proposition 8 read: “If I had a gun, I would have gunned you down along with each and every other supporter.” Other donors were forced to resign from their jobs after they were revealed as contributors to the Prop 8 effort.
This may seem like a harsh reaction to democracy in action. But the gay rights movement has always had an erratic relationship with basic democratic values.
Last May, gay activists shut down an American Psychiatric Association panel because two evangelicals were scheduled to appear. Ahead of the California vote, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom declared that same-sex marriage was coming to California “whether you like it or not.” Recently, a student at Los Angeles City College sued the school after a professor called him a “fascist bastard” and refused to allow him to finish a speech against gay marriage during a public speaking class.
The Left likes to depict support for traditional marriage as a fringe position. Never mind that the passage of Prop 8 brought to 30 the number of states that have constitutional amendments preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
And never mind that even many Americans who are receptive to same-sex unions feel uneasy about altering society’s most fundamental institution to include a relationship defined by a lifestyle that only 35 years ago the American Psychological Association listed as a “mental disorder.”
America’s continuing opposition to same-sex marriage is a consequence of an electorate that’s becoming more informed about the real world effects of same-sex marriage.
After the Massachusetts Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage, adoption agencies receiving government funds were told they could no longer place children only with opposite-sex spouses. Catholic Charities, the state’s most prolific adoption service, was thus forced to choose between closing its doors and violating one of the Church’s most fundamental teachings. When it asked the state for a religious exemption, gay rights leaders suggested that the Church was evil for asking for it. That sad reality underscores how the common retort, “How does my same-sex marriage affect you?” no longer works.
All of this reminds me of a headline from The Onion, the satirical newspaper, a few years ago that read: “Gay-Pride Parade Sets Mainstream Acceptance of Gays Back 50 Years.” Just as most Americans recoil from the sexual gratuitousness on display at most gay pride parades, Americans are rejecting a movement undone by its own hatred.
As columnist Debra Saunders, who supports homosexual marriage, wrote after Prop 8 passed and the riots were raging, “The gay community’s failure to show tolerance is costing it friends.” Indeed. This week a CBS News/New York Times poll found support for same-sex marriage dropping to 33 percent, from a high of 42 percent in April.
Homosexuality used to be referred to as “the love that dare not speak its name.” Today, homosexual activists display a hatred that just won’t shut up.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter