As some of you may know, Miss California has received a lot of heat regarding her answer to judge Perez Hilton's question about gay marriage. Considering the gay marriage debate is so central in California right now, I thought it was a fair questions to ask. (Although I heard the other contestants got far easier and less heated questions, but that's beside the point.)
Carrie replied with a heartfelt opinion that marriage is between a man and a woman-and has since discussed the "natural" order of things evinced in the Bible as proof. While I couldn't disagree with her more, I wholeheartedly believe that she is entitled to her opinion. There are a few things that really bother me about this whole issue and the fall out it has generated.
1. I am bothered by the fact that a beauty queen with a boob job feels that she is the authority to speak upon what is "natural" and therefore righteous in the eyes of God.
2. I am bothered my Carrie Prejean's insistence that her religious faith and beliefs are being attacked.
To add to this debate, a sexy hot topless photo of Miss California surfaced this week as well. Perfect timing huh? Granted, her back is turned and just a sliver of her breast is shown, but the photo is HAWT! Far too risque for a good little Christian girl who desires to save her body and sexual-ness for marriage. Prejean responded to the photo by saying that it was taken when she was 17 (is that supposed to make us feel better?) and delivered the following statement in her own defense: "I am a Christian and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos..."
What Prejean fails to recognize is that nobody is trashing her beliefs or her faith or the fact that she is a model. People are trashing the blatant, and ignorant hypocrisy which apparently allows Prejean to define and re-define her own views of morality, modesty, and God approved "natural-ness" while judging others for defining/re-defining morality and God approved "natural-ness." For some reason Prejean fails to recognize the hypocrisy evident for some of us in what she does, (which we can clearly justify as biblical offenses) and justifies it as okay because she is a Christian, AND a model. There must be some model clause or model exceptions to the rules that my training in seminary has over looked.
What this whole situation confirms for me is that people are perfectly fine with using "The Book" to justify whatever personal belief they have, or group they want to control, without really studying it, and considering why it says what it says.
To clarify, I personally don't find offense with Prejean's barely legal boob shot. The woman looks good and deserves to be a model. I am not offended that she got a boob job either. In fact I am contemplating getting one myself. I am offended that the literal approach she takes in understanding the Bible is applied inconsistently to the lives of others whose "lifestyle" she (and many others)disapprove.
So a note to Miss California: Don't be so quick to think that it's your religion we have a problem with. We (your critics) think that you are not approaching your own lifestyle with a fair measure of biblical literalism that you prefer to politically impose upon others with less acceptable lifestyles.
