Perez Hilton's Effeminate Rambling

By now, you've probably heard about the maelstrom surrounding the Miss USA Pageant. The contestant from California, Carrie Prejean, was denied the crown because she didn't support faux marriage. And in the video above is the vicious creature who raised that contentious issue during the pageant; he is a gossip whore and homosexual who goes by the name Perez Hilton.

And this man truly has no shame. In the video, he calls the 21-year-old Prejean a "dumb b****." In light of this, I have a question: Can we call Hilton a dumb fag? I mean, far be it from me to call him a dumb fag, but I'd just like to know if we can call him a dumb fag. Or is calling him a dumb fag out of bounds in some way?

Comments

[John Q. Public]

When a man is damaged in childhood, he can turn inward and self destruct or turn outward and attack females and babies. Mr. Hilton as turned outward. We can only hope that he does not become physical in his aggressions and hurt a child. His rage against females and children will continue until he either finds peace in Jesus or rests in peace. I pray for his tormented soul.

[tj]

Has anyone brought up Anita Bryant from umpteenth years ago? I've often wondered what happened to her. For instance, did she go into hiding from the gay radicals the way Salmon Rushdie had to hide from the Muslims?

As a female who has frequently triggered homosexual aggression, I'd really like this issue treated seriously. I think we were more aware as a society that the hatred many gay males have for women borders on the psychotic in decades past. If they identify with you, great; if not, watch your back.

That's the trouble I've seen with the gay rights movement in general, btw: Homosexuals and advocates tolerate and embrace behavior ranging from brutal, hateful speech to pederasty. Though such activity isn't condoned in a heterosexual, we dare not criticize it when it's part of the gay persona/lifestyle.

To go much further than even Miss Prejean, I think it's time the gays started denouncing deviants instead of vilifying the rest of society for setting limits that apply to all human behavior. That journalist who was killed during the course of engaging in statutory rape of a minor should've been pilloried by the gay community. Sure it was wrong for the 16 year old to kill him but one has to wonder just how this young boy came to be involved with hardcore gay sex in the first place. Seems to me, he had to have been victimized repeatedly in childhood by one or more men who likely never payed for their crimes. The journalist who got killed was just as competent to extrapolate the boy's history of abuse as I am yet he showed no empathy: he got what he deserved in spades. Though, yes, society now has to be protected from the once abused child who has become a psychopathic killer.

Yet the typical response to criticism of homosexual excesses is excoriation for relatively minor flaws or a focus extreme behaviors done by a small percentage of heterosexuals. I can tell you the homosexuals I've interacted through the years have been anything but that model gay that once becoming part of a couple makes a family so stable, educated and loving they make better parents than most heterosexual couples. I also think that if gays were more interested in improving their lives than in punishing heterosexuals, they'd stop attacking marriage and Christianity and come up with their own version of marriage, respectfully and rightfully calling it by a different name, and create their own churches instead of subverting those in existence.

I still don't understand how gays can preach tolerance while actively eradicating any institution or tradition that doesn't cater to their whims and needs. Were the impetus behind gay activism anything but destruction and deconstruction, gays might even come up with a contract for a civil union that far surpasses the one for marriage. I don't think we'll ever see the emergence of a utopian sect of the androgynous yet highly evolved because it's only the stuff of science fiction after all but I believe this subconscious belief must be common otherwise we wouldn't accept blatant attempts to subvert an order that is not only natural but functioning. I for one would at least like to see some blueprints before we lay waste to religion and tradition while making the world anew.

[Mike]

This guy is the scum of the earth. All I know is there will never be a shortage of fuel in hell thanks to all the faggots like this stupid piece of trash.

[Walt]

Who is Perez Hilton and why should we care? It this guy(?) applied force to Miss USA to "rip her crown off her head" I S*&t you not I would beat the tar out of that scum...If she didn't do it first. What a clown...He is the perfect example of what is wrong with America.

[Philip France]

Why is a sodomite "judging" a beauty pageant in which women are contestants?

Why isn't this deviant pervert judging the opinions and physiques of the other sodomites at his local bath house?

[NaperBille]

Watching his video, Perez is struggling to enunciate while absent some sort of object in his mouth.

Not sure what object he's missing, but clearly he struggles to speak when orally unencumbered.

Clearly, he needs to work on his diction.

[John]

You know the TRULY sad part about this is that she gave an HONEST response. The question was not what the WORLD thinks but what SHE thinks.

I don't understand why homosexuals need to push their agenda down everyone's throats.

I love fishing, but you don't see me lobbing congress to make it a national holiday and have a parade for it. Although I bet MORE people would come to that! LOL

[Roert Berger]

Phil, gay men have been judges in beauty beauty from the very beginning. You self-righteous "Shocked! I'm shocked"! attitude about a gay man judging a beuty contest is laughably naive.
Get over it,hopmophobes. Gays participate in countless ways to society. Who cares?

[Robert Berger]

My mistake.I meant to say beuty contests,not beauty beauty.

[Philip France]

Robert:

To call me a "homophobe" suggests that I have a fear of sodomites. I do not. To say that I dislike them is also a mistake. I deplore the homosexual lifestyle, not the homosexual him or herself. I have homosexual friends and colleagues that know of my disapproval of their proclivities and yet I maintain their respect because I disagree with them on substantive grounds. I have also led at least one young man away from this lifestyle of bondage into liberty.

You cast aspersions such as "laughably naive" but yet you have not ever backed a single assertion of yours with actual fact.

To make assertions such as yours without substantiating it through factum and/or datum is worse that "laughably naive"; it is infantile.

Grow up.