Sorry, but I don't recall any homily (that's the talk they give after the readings in a catholic service) or sermon condemning plastic surgery.
Right on with the modesty bit, though.

I disagree with her, but she has a right to say what she wants. When gays attack social conservatives for their beliefs, it dampens my sympathy for their cause. You can say whatever you want but those who disagree with you can't?

Oh, and for the record, I think Perez Hilton is an antagonistic little dickhead. He's the gay equivalent of a feminazi. A screeching little fuckwad who throws childish insults and tries to silence anyone whose views he doesn't share.

She shouldn't have been asked about her personal politics, anyway.

Is this a beauty pageant or a PC pageant? if it's beauty (and the bikinis argue it is) then get back to looks only. I don't give a rats ass what they think personally, but if you're going to ask them, they should be allowed to answer.

Her answer does agree with the majority of Americans still. And gays aren't winning friends by asking someone what they think then lambasting them for it.

ahw, the thnking is that we are made in gods immiage therefore plastic surgery is like telling god he made a mistake, which is impossible becuase hes perfect and everyone is born the way they are supposed to look - At least thats how the facist chritians though police officers I run across occastional explain it.

I cant really describe the facinating shade of purpe the turn when I ask them to explain circumcison, hair cuts, shaving, and earrings once they are done with their little tirades on body modifiction

A few thoughts, in no particular order:

Criticising her statement does not equal the censorship she and her supporters claim. "I do not think that word means what you think it means," to quote a character from "The Princess Bride."

Her poor articulation exposed poor thinking, if clear thinking and expression really were what the judges look for in these contests.

I thought these contests required "all natural" parts, with nothing artificial.

At least she does not have any racy photographs surfacing, other than the ones she promotes. I assume those meet with some of her Christian supporters' ideals.

This must qualify for the weekly National Tempest in a Teapot.

As for modesty:
"Fake thou not thine boobage, neither with silicone, nor with water, nor with any gelatinous artifice. Moreover, thou shalt not increase the flesh of thine lips, nor shalt though wear specious undergarments that giveth the illusion of having a butt when thou clearly lackest one."

By the way, Lujlp, what church are you recoiling from? I don't think I've ever heard the subject addressed in the ones I've gone to. On the other hand, I don't recall anyone asking about it, either.

Would most people even know this beauty pageant even occurred without this controversy? I think she should be able to say whatever the hell she wants (for gay marriage, against it; there is a god, there is no god; she hates the KKK, she's a member of the KKK), but I also think that the organization and judges who run this have the right to not give her the crown for what she says. This isn't the government trying to censor her beliefs, this is a private group and they should have the right to pick/hire the person they think is going to best suit the job.

The NYT commenter wrote: "But Christianity and the Bible are very clear on moral standards for modesty, which she obviously ignores by not only parading on national TV in a bikini, but also surgically enhancing her body's natural form."

Really? Since the Bible is "very clear" on this issue, please site a supporting scripture reference.

Thank you.

"What I wonder, though, is whether those who are squawking about this happening to Carrie Prejean would squawk the same if it happened because she said she didn't believe in god"

Do you seriously believe that if Carrie had announced on stage that she was an atheist, that prominent public religious figures (Rick Warren, Franklin Graham, whoever) would have launched an all-out campaign of hatred & character assassination against her, with the intent of silencing her & forcing her away from public life? As ridiculous & evidence-free as some of their beliefs may be, I have never heard of them offering Hitchens, Dawkins, or any other prominent atheist anything other than vigorous disagreement & an opportunity to debate. Yet here you are, drawing a pathetic & twisted moral equivalence between them & the loathsome fascist faggots like Hilton who are out to utterly destroy a person simply for stating in public what a majority of Americans still believe in private.

You never put up with feminazis spewing hatred against men & any women who don't buy into their ideology. You know that that is never justified just because, in their own minds, they are victims fighting for a righteous cause. Yet when gay rights nazis do the same thing, instead of calling them out on it, you write a post piling onto their target, and suggesting she has no credibility because she puffed up her tits a bit. Has your passion for the cause of gay marriage warped your judgement that badly?

Plastic surgery didn't exist 2000 years ago, but Christ didn't order Mary Magdalene to wear a burka, and he never condemned any woman for doing what she could to make herself look good. Carrie's actions may be debatable, but they do not even begin to sink to the depths of those who scream hysterically for their rights 24 hours a day, yet want to take rights away from anyone who doesn't agree with them.

Martin, do you really thing Ms Alkon's "piling on" anybody? It seems to me her point was that some of Miss California's defenders wouldn't be so vocal if she'd said something they didn't like. I don't find that idea terribly startling.

Neither am I startled by the notion that some observant Christians are selective in their beliefs. However, I'm not sure I'd limit this observation to Christians.

I am Christian, but I would absolutely support Miss America's right to be an atheist. It simply does not have anything to do with being Miss America. I don't think questions about religion or politics are even appropriate, but if asked the contestant should not be forced to lie just to be politically correct. I did not watch the pageant, so if she really did stumble through the question in an inarticulate way, I guess that's a different story. But simply holding a particular view on a controversial subject shouldn't matter. And by the way, not all Christians agree on issues like swimsuits or plastic surgery or even gay marriage. Call it picking and choosing if you will but I call it having a mind of one's own.

At least she does not have any racy photographs surfacing, other than the ones she promotes. I assume those meet with some of her Christian supporters' ideals.

Actually, they came out yesterday. There is talk of her loosing her crown.

What's that ol' adage? "If you don't like the answers, don't ask the questions."

She answered honestly and lost the crown. Well, life lessons – move on. She wan’t disrespectful to anyone with what she said – agree or disagree, she answered the question truthfully. Would everyone have felt much better if she had just lied for the win? Come ON!

Onto the Christian woman's comment - Oy! Talk about being hypocritical while judging another hypocrite (which is precisely why I find some religious people so fucking annoying). If she wants to use her bible as a guide on how to live the perfect life - it may behoove her to actually read it “Judge not yet ye be judged”.

Side bar observation: She is acting out on her own internalized self-hatred of her *perceived* sexual inferiority (oppressive religion will do this to women – they feel trapped, powerless and resentful so they lash out when other women don’t “behave” like them, and are enjoying life's success). She is making statements which would be sexist if they were coming from a man. Who needs enemies with friends like these!

Which now brings me to the spineless-little-fraction-of-a-man Perez Hilton. Perez, because he is gay gets a pass on sexist statements/drawings HE made against the contestant. I am speaking specifically to the posted drawing he did of a dick shooting cum all over her picture on his website All this because because he didn’t like what she said. What a fucking baby.

So, in the year 2009 here is how far we've come:

You don't act or dress the way I like, you're a whore who is going to hell. You don't answer the way I like, you are a whore who will be humiliated.

The whole scene is foul.

Feebie - what woman's comment are you talking about? It doesn't sound like anyone here.

Please excuse the studder on my post above...

By the way, Lujlp, what church are you recoiling from? I don't think I've ever heard the subject addressed in the ones I've gone to. On the other hand, I don't recall anyone asking about it, either. - old rpm daddy

I was raised a mormon, but I figured out by the time I was 10 what a crock of shit that was, as to which religion - members of nearly all of them

Answering your question, "whether those who are squawking about this happening to Carrie Prejean would squawk the same if it happened because she said she didn't believe in god?" If she were asked "do you believe in god?", and her answer was along the lines of "Its great that we live in a country where we all can believe as we choose, but I don't believe in God", I think most people wouldn't bat an eye. While many of her current defenders wouldn't rush to her defense in this hypothetical, I find it hard to believe that she'd be dragged through the mud as she is now.

Hi Karen,

That comment was directed at the comment re-posted by Amy above:

"And by the way, like this commenter at NYTimes.com, I do find her beliefs, and those of most Christians, rather selective:"

My language was overwrought, but I still think the moral equivalence Amy tried to draw is false. If Miss California had announced she was an atheist, Christians would not have reacted to her in the hysterical & hateful way that gay rights supporters have. And all of us are selective in our beliefs, but I still think that most atheists & Christians alike would agree that screaming for your rights while trying to silence anyone who disagrees with you is more hypocritical than parading around in a bathing suit. And BTW, what is any gay man doing judging a woman's beauty contest? Is PC so strong that no one can point out how silly that is?

Yes, she does have a right to her opinion and if she were SIMPLY REPRESENTING HERSELF she could talk about this as long as the media will listen. But she is NOT simply representing herself, she is representing an organization, which is larger than her and her opinions. THAT is where I see the problem.

"I thought these contests required "all natural" parts, with nothing artificial."
You would be wrong, then. Many professional pageant girls have all KINDS of enhancements, from fake teeth to fake hair to fake tits.

And, as pointed out, there are racy photos. You can't see anything, but she's topless and in panties. I'd say that's a little racy... certainly not something I'd want my boss or grandma getting ahold of.

I'm ambivalent about gay marriage, but I'm not ambivalent about hate. These self-proclaimed supporters of gay marriage have tarnished their movement and destroyed whatever moral high ground they claimed to possess.

Perhaps Perez Hilton is a Mormon operative who has infiltrated the gay community in order to discredit them.

I would like to clarify that above I was talking about all the media appearances she did AFTER the actually pageant.

She answered the question how she wanted to, which is her right. But afterwards she shouldn't have persued this.

She went on so many shows and kept the focus on this issue, when she should have simply said "I stand by my answer." and let that be it. Instead she used her title (given to her by the organization that doesn't adovate this particular personal belief of hers) to create a media platform from which to push the issue.

adovate = advocate

"Yes, she does have a right to her opinion and if she were SIMPLY REPRESENTING HERSELF she could talk about this as long as the media will listen. But she is NOT simply representing herself, she is representing an organization, which is larger than her and her opinions. THAT is where I see the problem."

I would agree with this completely if not for the fact that this organization blessed Perez's question prior to her answer. So it would have been okay if she had lied to get the job?

The organization goofed and now wants to pin it on her for their lack of good judgement.

"And BTW, what is any gay man doing judging a woman's beauty contest? Is PC so strong that no one can point out how silly that is?"

Uh Martin, there is a whole organization run by gay men that is called "the fashion industry". It's sole job is to judge a womans beauty.

"Is PC so strong that no one can point out how silly that is?"

Oh and behind every pretty woman there is an even prettier man applying her makeup and selecting her dresses.

Prejean's crown is threatened by the fact that she has appeared in public functions as Miss California without permission of the pagaent people - in violation of her contract.

It seems like she's playing the martyr, trying to ride this controversy to greater notoriety.

She would do well to remember Anita Bryant. Although a darling of the fervently religious set, she was so strident and polarizing a figure that the mainstream quickly tired of her.

Hilton's a scumbag. He sandbagged Prejean to get his pet topic on a national forum. I hope it blows up in his face at least as much as it is blowing up in hers. But, alas, it won't.

And, as far as "Miss Anti-Gay-Marriage" being a bad representative of California, didn't Proposition 8 pass in this state? Seems to me she's in line with the opinion of a majority of the state's population.

"Uh Martin, there is a whole organization run by gay men that is called the fashion industry"

Yes, I know, and that's damn silly too.

"Yes, I know, and that's damn silly too. "

Why Martin? Gay men are the best judges of a womans beauty.

Feebie,

That is why I clarified that I was talking about the media appearance AFTER the pageant. NOT the actually answer she gave.

Martin, do you really thing Ms Alkon's "piling on" anybody? It seems to me her point was that some of Miss California's defenders wouldn't be so vocal if she'd said something they didn't like. I don't find that idea terribly startling.

Exactly. Thank you.

Another thought: I wonder what the reaction would have been if this were said by a moslem or non-white christian contestant?

Esther - gotcha ;)

I didnt see your post before I responded.

A couple of thoughts, Amy:

1. I would equally condemn any criticism of a person who declared that they were an atheist. My disgust at those criticizers who be identical.

2. Several commenters on here have showed their true colours - ie. there's absolutely nothing wrong with outing and ridiculing anyone who dares to not join the Secular Humanist Conga Line. To deny that this isn't prevalent in our society today is truly beyond belief!

Robert dont be a moron, throughout history everyone has outed and more than ridiculed everyone who does not belive the same thing they do.

Would you prefre the old system we had wherein we killed those who beived differently?

"Would you prefre the old system we had wherein we killed those who beived differently?"

So just because we aren't killing people makes this okay?

In a word.

Yes.

If you say something I find stupid I can say so. And the reverse applies as well.

If I want to make a complete ass out of myself doing so, I can, as can you.

Dont tell me you want to live in a world where no one could say anything that anyone might find offensive?

All though living in a world where no one ever talks doesnt sound that bad, no pun intended

Did that give you a little thrill, 'Lujlp'?

My little man, there are many more choices than the binary options you've provided.

You might be perfectly happy with this insidious attempt to silence people's opinions by trying to destroy their careers & reputations but I do not.

Incidentally, the whole issue of Free Speech is going to hit the fan again with the banning of Michael Savage from the UK. For the record, many times I think he's a loudmouthed boob but never have I suggested that he be banned from speaking his opinion. He claims he's going to sue Jacqui Smith personally and the British gov't generally. It'll be an interesting case to be sure!

This story should be of particular interest to Canadians, whose free speech rights are clearly anything but free thanks to our despicable "human rights" commissions.

And though Americans feel that their free speech is guaranteed, is it actually if in practice various corners act to destroy you simply for speaking your mind? I think not.

"I'm completely for gay marriage."

But not in favor of straight marriage. What do you have against gays? ;)

Well 'Robert'(how many roberts are there in vancouver anyway) I see you couldnt take my advice

Please quote where I said I was happy with "insidious attempt(s) to silence people's opinions by trying to destroy their careers & reputations"

As I recall I said people have the right to riducle each other and be assholes - like you.

You see you said something stupid and attemted to put words in my mouth, then agrued against a point I never made, and were an ass about it.

And now I am ridiculing you for being a giant peice of crap.

And niether one of us has set out to destroy eachothers livelyhoods.

Seems the system I support works just fine.

I find this whole thing quite amusing, because it wasn't so very long ago that a contestant would have been drummed out of the pageant for supporting gay marriage.

What I wonder, though, is whether those who are squawking about this happening to Carrie Prejean would squawk the same if it happened because she said she didn't believe in god.

What I wonder is whether those who endorse the decision would still do so in that case.

Wait a minute... No, I most definitely do not wonder.

Gee, people are often hypocritical? Who knew?

"Why Martin? Gay men are the best judges of a womans beauty."

Really? That's why the fashion world has gone completely over to waifs who look-suprise suprise-like little boys? Because that's women's beauty? I think gay men and most of the fashion industry hate women. They certainly hate real women's bodies.

"I do find her beliefs, and those of most Christians, rather selective"

"For her to use Biblical justification for her opinions while contradicting herself by even appearing in a pageant, much less having fake breasts, is hypocritical to say the least."

Of course, because it's in your imagination that it's against the bible to have breast implants. Good grief. Give it a break!!!

It's not an obvious sin to have breast implants unlike homosexuality, audultery, murder.

Perhaps, it is wrong to get nude pictures taken? Yeah, it's an issue of discretion and being a role model, but the sin isn't obvious.

Atheists and especially Liberals should stop with judging Christians since they obviously don't know what they're doing. It might be considered hypocritical to judge others as it is in their own rules on judging. Atheists should call themselves on their own hypocrisy.

Another thing, I didn't realize that beauty contest have now became unsafe for Christians. Aren't the beauty pagents scholarship programs and have a wholesome image? No, it degenerated into the example given by its judges... the despicable gay provocateur and the co-director and a lead spokeswoman of the Miss California pageant was a former Playboy Playmate.

Okay, let's not have Christians participate for their own good. They will have to make the trek to Las Vegas, Sin City of all places. Let's not go for Christian's own sake. They will get corrupted. Or maybe they should be compromised by endorsing gay marriage by lying about their views. And to get Amy's blessing, say they aren't Christians and proclaim themselves as Atheists.

In America, Atheists are still a minority, but I'm sure Amy can't wait for that to change.

You know what I can't wait for? For Atheists and Liberals to call Muslims hypocrits for not stoning women and gays. We can't have that, right?

I noticed that American Muslims are largely quiet about opposing gay marriage. Is that wrong and hypocritical to their religious beliefs?

> Gay men are the best judges of
> a womans beauty.

Strongly disagree. Maybe the most successful performers in the 20th century fashion industry (who were likely to be men in any case) had some disproportionately good appreciation for non-sexual prettiness...

But that's not the same thing as "a woman's beauty". The prettiest 19yo female fashion models, when sitting on a park bench with their 12- and 13-year old brothers, would get no admiration from those gay judges. It ain't about "women".

PS- Would anyone believe that lesbians, at any age, are the best judge of masculinity? The blessings of gender (and gender preference) are complimentary, but they're not perfectly symmetrical.

"Um, I'm a little more concerned that American Muslims are almost completely quiet about how the Quran commands them to kill or convert the infidel, and how so many Muslims are working to do just that"

So some types of hypocrisy is acceptable?

anon, if hypocrisy werent acceptable how could preists ever molest children? Or preachers dedicated to speading gods message of poverty, chastity, and fedelity spend millions on the meth they suck off the dick of prostitues while the wife watches the children?

Hypocricy is the only thing that allows religion to function

anon, if hypocrisy werent acceptable how could preists ever molest children? Or preachers dedicated to speading gods message of poverty, chastity, and fedelity spend millions on the meth they suck off the dick of prostitues while the wife watches the children?

Hypocricy is the only thing that allows religion to function

"Hypocricy is the only thing that allows religion to function"

Or leftist politics to prosper.

Amy: You forget hypocrisy is the only standard that leftists reserve for themselves and they don't maintain it for a second.

Just type in leftist hypocrisy in Google and see what you find.

Sure,hypocrisy is rift on both sides, but religion (which is being attacked here) is not about hypocrisy, but the STANDARD of behavior and morals. It's the morals that matter.

Leftists who don't have any consistent standards or morals have only hypocrisy as a crutch.

Whatever you said about Gingrich, I agree. With that, he isn't running for anything now. I suppose with whatever standards the Republicans have, their standards are a bit higher than the Democrats. I said "a bit higher".

With what's going on the Obama Administration and a Democratic Congress, I suppose the hypocrisy has reached trillion dollar deficit levels.

> Hypocrisy is rife on both sides.

I think this is may be the biggest topic that can carry blog-mobsters to the next tier of insight –exactly how bad a sin is hypocrisy?

It's pretty bad, but it's not the worst. Young people like it because you can issue a citation without thinking about it too much.

But I'll always prefer listening to people who know (and describe) the difference between right and wrong, even if their own behavior isn't always exemplary.

Sure,hypocrisy is rift on both sides, but religion (which is being attacked here) is not about hypocrisy, but the STANDARD of behavior and morals. It's the morals that matter.

Posted by: anon3323432

Morals like tounging children? Or having to ignore 2/3rd of your gods commandment becuase they dont mesh with modren society? Or claiming that sex before marrige is immoral even though for thosands of years marriges were nothing more than to people who agreed to live together with out the aid of a priest or the government?

Please anon religion is a crutch for people too weak to behave without the threat of hell to make them act nicely