The current Miss California USA, Carrie Prejean, became a Religious Right heroine when she professed allegiance to religious opposition to gay marriage during the Miss USA pageant, a few weeks ago. She has since then acquired a reputation as being persecuted for her religious beliefs … something the Religious Right — and many other sorts of Christians too — are particularly vulnerable to, because of Christianity’s origins and nature. But it turns out Ms Prejean is not the devoutly religious angel her followers consider her, as CNN reports:

Miss California USA Carrie Prejean “breached her contract” by keeping semi-nude photos a secret and could be stripped of her beauty queen title, according to a state pageant spokesman.

The national pageants impose morals clauses on contestants and disclosures of anything even marginally questionable are required … apparently, she did not do that in this case:

The spokesman for Miss California USA provided CNN with a copy of the pageant contract Prejean signed last year agreeing that the discovery of semi-nude photos could mean disqualification.

“You’ll see in the agreement that she signed that she clearly violated the terms of her reign as Miss California USA, but we don’t expect a decision to be made today,” Neal said.

Of course, her followers among the Christian world are none too happy about this obvious breach of morality. However, they aren’t holding her responsible for her immoral conduct and her violation of a contract with the pageant. Instead, she — and they — are accusing their opponents of having fabricated the whole thing:

Prejean said the photos — taken when she was 17 and aspiring to be a Victoria’s Secret model — were being used in a “vicious and mean-spirited” effort to silence her for “defending traditional marriage.”

Of course, it’s not as though the photos in question were a hoax, photoshopped to make her look bad. No, they’re the real thing. That they represent a breach of the moral behavior one would expect of a fine young Christian woman who believes in all things traditional, is simply not relevant to her:

“I am not perfect, and I will never claim to be,” she said. “But these attacks on me and others who speak in defense of traditional marriage are intolerant and offensive. While we may not agree on every issue, we should show respect for others’ opinions and not try to silence them through vicious and mean-spirited attacks.”

In other words, she feels entitled to fall grossly short of the standards of behavior that other pageant contestants — Christian and non-Christian alike — agreed to abide by, and have no one notice it.

Give me a break! This is exactly the sort of hypocrisy that so many Christians love to engage in, and then whine and fume and carry on sanctimoniously when someone catches them at it and says so.

Note to Ms Prejean and all other Christians who are not clear on this: Jesus Christ himself explicitly and unambiguously forbid you ever to be hypocritical. A few relevant verses are: Mt 6:2, 5, 16; 7:5; 23:13-15; and Lk 6:42. There are, of course, plenty more.

I also love how it’s “intolerant” (and therefore — she implies — wrong) of people to point out her own moral failings, yet somehow it’s not “intolerant” — and therefore not wrong, but righteous instead! — of her to condemn gay couples. Hmm. I have no idea what sort of universe that makes rational sense in, but it’s not this one.

Tags: , , , , ,

  • Liam1306

    Hypocrisy?

    Sounds like non-diety judgenent to me

    G_d put men and women on the earth to go forth, reproduce and multiply; the most basic building block of life for all life, especially here on Earth

    .

    No life, no matter how politically incorrect, will ever spring forth from the "true" love and sex – not reproductive behavior – between same sex human partners.

    For those whom seek to bash me for my personal views – I accepted my homosexual friends, family members and their views long before (50 years) your parents beget your life as a result.

    For those whom aspire to wealth, intellect and popularity; the simplest bird, and the poorest human being, have a better chance at an after life than your professed self-interest.

    Yet still, these words still do not denounce your views.

    The Earth is dying, and mankind must load a spaceship to carry on our species.

    Whom do we choose to carry on life.

    Those whom cannot procreate, or those that can.

    This is the tween view between sex, and reproductive behavior.

    It is all good sex; it is NOT all reproductive behavior/

  • PsiCop

    Liam1306, thank you for your comment.

    I'm not sure how any of it justifies Ms Prejean's hypocrisy and violation of her contract, though.

    As for loading humanity on a spaceship, others before you have advocated something like that, but came to a bad end because of it (here's an explanation of what I mean). I certainly do not wish the same for you, even if I disagree with you.

  • ZodRau

    Liam1306:

    Your argument is weak unless you advocate also denying marriage to heterosexual couples who either have no intention of making babies, or are incapable of making them. Further, you'd also have to go along with the anullment of any existing marriages between men & women that have not produced offspring. Heck, if procreation is all people are good for, I'm sure you're in favor of requiring all heterosexuals get married and make babies or else.

  • PsiCop

    Thanks for the comment & support, ZodRau!

    FYI, I went over these same issues in a blog post (about a year ago now).