Former Miss California Sues for Religious Discrimination

Reader Comments
Back to article

Just to add, if you oppose this lawsuit, it doesn't mean you think it's OK to discriminate on religious grounds, just that this particular case just doesn't seem to make sense in light of the other types of open discrimination surrounding the rules for contestants.
Ms. Prejean is certainly within her rights to speak freely, as a citizen of the United States, but it sounds like she is arguing that her religious opinions are the primary reasons as to why she was fired (lost her crown).
Much of America, for whatever reason, supports the traditional view of marriage (not making a judgment call with that statement, as this poster has noooooooo interest in any type of marriage, thank you very much, though others can do as they wish, gay or straight). Thus, her opinion really wasn't as controversial as it was made out to be by many of the more socially progressive media outlets that covered the entire brouhaha.
It just seems outrageous to willingly enter into a position where the rules surrounding the contest already place limits on age, physical appearance and marital status, then turn around and argue against a totally different form of alleged discrimination.
Not a lawyer, but does a pageant contestant from a particular state get to sue based on the traditional civil rights violations that someone who perhaps was employed by state government would be? If that were the case with a state or national level pageant system, then surely none of the age or marital status rules would hold up in the first place.
Again, I could be incorrect, but the last time I actually took a look at the entry information regarding the Miss USA contestants, there was at least an age requirement, and I thought marital status, too (as in contestants should be unmarried when they enter).
As for the very real religious discrimination that does go on, it's the state universities that are always in trouble for this.
http://www.thefire.org
Many cases have come before The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education because a Christian student group could not get campus recognition, or because the pro-life law students were not allowed to be officially recognized (how can anyone have a debate about hot-button social and political issues with only one side of the debate actually allowed to even show up???).
So, look to the real instances of religious discrimination, first, as it is clearly a civil rights issue on a state university campus.
But a pageant where so many other biases occur as part of the whole culture? Good luck with that lawsuit.
Not a lawyer, of course, but it just sounds bizarre.
True religious discrimination, of course, is not at all appropriate. Not in America.

Angie Koutrotsios of IL 9:50PM September 14, 2009

First of all, isn't it true that women cannot even enter the Miss USA pageant unless they are unmarried? So, right up front, your marital status is an issue with regards to whether or not you can enter the pageant.
Secondly, there's also an age requirement, too, I do believe. So, now you've got age discrimination, but of course, since it is not run by federal or state government, the pageant is free to stipulate whatever types of rules it wants contestants to abide by.
That said, you've willingly entered into a marital status and age discriminating contest (oh, and looks, too, because you have to be gorgeous to enter), so you then sue for some type of other alleged discrimination and claim to be slandered, but you're also a public figure, which raises the bar very high in terms of winning anything.
Will a judge just please throw the whole lot of them out of court if if ever gets that far? That this nonsense is clogging up the dockets is an embarrassment to America's legal system.

Angie Koutrotsios of IL 8:26PM September 04, 2009

HI I JUST WANT TO ENCOURAGE MISS PREJEAN,I LIKE THAT SHE STOOD UP AND VOICED WHAT MORE PEOPLE SHOULD BE SAYING ALSO,SHE IS A BEAUTIFUL WOMAN,INSIDE AND OUTSIDE ,MARRIAGE AS GOD RULES STATED IN THE BIBLE IS MAN AND WOMAN,AND NOW LAWS ARE BEING VOTED ON TO ALLOW SAME SEX MARRIAGES,ITS ALL PART OF THE DOWN FALL IF ISNT STOPPED OF OUR COUNTRY ,I FEEL MISS PREJEAN BASED ON ALL INVOLVED IN THE PAGEANT WAS THE WINNER,AND HOPE SHE CONTINUES TO TELL HER THOUGHTS AND TRUTHS DONT BUCKLE THE WAY LOTS HAVE DONE TO ALLOW A MINORITY OF TWISTED THINKING AND BELIEFS TO BECOME REALITY FOR ALL TO HAVE TO ABIDE BY,AND YES THE EFFECT THAT TODAYS CHILDREN SEE WHAT IS GOING ON WILL INSTILL UPON THEIR THINKING AS BEING NORMAL ,WHEN IN REALITY IT CREATES A EMOTIONAL AND UNSTABLE HOME AND LIFE FOR THEM,LOTS OF DEPPRESSION TO SAY THE LEAST ITS LIKE THEY THINK ANY THING GOES AND DOWN GOES OUR NATION,ITS A MATTER OF TIME ,GOD WILL NOT ALLOW IT FOR LONG HE DIDNT IN THE PAST TO LANDS THAT PRACTICED SUCH TWISTED BELIEFS OF LIVING,SO IM BACKING MISS PREJEAN 100 % AND WILL OFFER MY HELP TO HER IN ANY WAY I CAN,I WANT HER TO KNOW THAT SHE ISNT ALONE I DO HOPE SHE IS ABLE TO READ THIS AND WOULD REALLY LIKE TO MEET HER IF POSSIBLE,BUT FOR NOW SHE WILL BE IN MY PRAYERS ,THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO VOICE MY CONCERNS AND THOUGHTS.

JERRY KOVACS of MI 2:52AM September 04, 2009

My God. It's so obvious that those judges are in the wrong. And in response to that lawyer -- it is NOT a sound argument to claim that the expression of one's honest beliefs are to blame for others' ridicule of that person. Also note that the lawyer never mentions any EVIDENCE that the judge had concrete basis for firing Prejean.
The insubstantiality of the firing is itself a serious issue, but we're dealing with suppression of beliefs here, too. I have nothing against gays/lesbians/whatever; but how can they, who claim to suffer persecution themselves, persecute someone else for being different? For being honest and courageous? What's with these double standards?
I support Prejean all the way. She is entitled to her right to say what she believes, especially when DIRECTLY ASKED. That she should suffer any penalty for tapping into her FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS is just unlawful.
California is really going down the drain.

Lena of NJ 10:12PM September 02, 2009

Go away!

JDZ57 of WI 8:12AM September 02, 2009

A Public Figure is threatening to sue for libel and slander.
Sarah Palin redux.
Theories about the likely outcome?
Dismissed with prejudice.

Angie Koutrotsios of IL 9:47PM September 01, 2009

Well I guess the only thing to say is that she should win in court but likely will not since she is in California, where the little gay boys and girls will fill the jury. The problem is Christ is not the only person that would feel she is wronged here. If we didn’t have the little girly boys as judges in the pagent (Perez) and wanting to force their way of life on us it would not be a problem. She was asked a question and it took guts on her part to say what she believes. I likely would have found a different answer. But nature knows that a man and a woman belong together. Not just Christians. Go try to pawn off the opposite belief to any other in the world but the worldly trash. Try Jewish, try Muslim (Oh they would behead you). You have a mass majority of the WORLD that does not like gay life. Personally if you want to play that game, have a blast. Just don’t cause a scene when I tell you that it isn’t normal. And all the Fox news crap is really getting old. Can’t you come up with better things than that? Are they that strong that you are that afraid of them? Try looking at the blogs. You would find many more with much more radical views against you than Fox. You are funny people. It is amusing to read your sad stories.

RB of TX 6:23PM September 01, 2009

If you're the typical Christian, the church is in peril. Carrie Prejean is an egotist, not a hero, and you're not nearly the sage you think you are. You and Carrie both seem to have the attitude of the teabaggers and the town hallers---characters Jesus didn't bother extolling as I recall.
As for your legal analysis, you're probably right that Carrie has a written contract. And that ALONE most likely exempts and trumps her spurious claim of religious discrimination.

Muser of NM 5:41PM September 01, 2009

Hey dunb A$$. "employment at will" is meaningless if there is a contract, which the this article and others say that there is.
Agreed, average citizens probably won't be concerned. Since you are below average, you definitely won't be.

joey of TX 4:16PM September 01, 2009

These little group of disgraced, unbelievers, arrogants, have secured their pot at the hell. When they are gone tomorrow nobody will recall these kind of trashy people, who passed by this fallen world. To Miss California, my hat off, and I hope she find a man worthy of her, so decent, beautiful and elegant woman, practically a piece of light and decency among the pigs barn.

guardman of KS 4:13PM September 01, 2009