There’s been quite a stir regarding the comments made by “Ms. California” beauty queen Carrie Prejean. Her response to a question (indubitably meant to incense controversy) has left many social commentators falling over themselves in outrage and subsequently attempting to smear and destroy the contestant. Perhaps the most disheartening truth from the fray over Prejean is that this is just another footnote in the long story of marginalization, censorship, and trivializing legitimate beliefs.
Prejean was asked a question about her personal beliefs and responded with a candid answer. During the final round of the “Miss U.S.A.” pageant, she was asked a question regarding her sentiments about the legality of homosexual marriage. So the bold Ms. Prejean gave her answer truthfully: she doesn’t think all states should redefine marriage, she politely offers that her personal belief defines marriage as man and woman. And here’s when things get sour.
Now, it seems a more newsworthy headline would be that the pageant contestant failed to somehow wish for world peace, end hunger, and save all the “wittle cutesy-wootsy baby seals” in her response; that’s what shocked me. Instead, she simply and respectfully expressed a sentiment that many Americans hold. Even a popular majority in “progressive” California share her belief. So, what’s all the uproar? How unbearably sex-o-centric of me to be so closed minded.
The question was asked by judge and jockey of Hollywood coattails, the eminent “Perez Hilton” (born Mario Armando Lavandeira, Jr.). During his rigorous studies getting a degree in “Drama” from NYU, it seems he at least took away the ability to create it. Of course, he forgoes the whole stage, story, script, characters, plot, and other toilsome elements get in the way. His medium of choice is the perpetually classy internet blog and the ever-reliable tabloid. Apparently, eloquent use of the English language wasn’t taught at haughty NYU either. He called Prejean a “dumb bitch” on his blog and also referred to her during an MSNBC interview using a word that rhymes with what the Minnesota Vikings typically do after three downs.
And thus we’ve arrived at tolerance junction. And what’s its function? Well, it’s apparently to tolerate those who agree with you and scourge those who don’t. Those who demand we tolerate and accept all viewpoints, lifestyle choices, sexual orientations, etc. are perennially the most intolerant, zealous, and shrill. All you have to do is call those you disagree with you “hateful and intolerant” and you have a license to abuse, crush, and silence opposition.
Judging by the juvenile response from our excitable “Perez”, he didn’t ask the question because he cared about her answer; he only cared if she agreed with him. Although he denies this in his MSNBC interview, his excuse for marking her down was that she didn’t represent all Americans with her answer. Well, had she capitulated and given the “right” answer she would have sold out her values and the beliefs of many Americans. His position is untenable.
Prejean’s popularity and press coverage has soared (can anyone even name…uh, the other gal who won?) and she has taken a bold stance on the issue. I admire her tenacity. She openly talks about how Christian beliefs and values influence her life. With the surge in Prejean’s appeal, the threatened “progressives'” smear campaign begins. The foremost attack: a release of “nude” pictures (which don’t expose anything more than you see at the beach…or during the swimwear section of the pageant).
Prejean will likely be accused of unbearable hypocrisy for the suggestive photos released. In the end, the hypocrisy seems to cast a larger shadow on her critics. We have a group of people in the country who demand embracing all viewpoints, tolerance, and non-conformity. However, the only one can avoid being called hateful, bigoted, “dumb bitch”, etc. is to embrace their beliefs and conform to their system of values.
Tolerance for “progressives” like the ubiquitous “Perez” is about as meaningful as a set of useless DVDs from the President. If the hysterical moaning over “tolerance” and “acceptance” from left-wing socialites wasn’t so deafening, this issue would be far less important to me. But the double standard is, well, intolerable.
The point remains: the validity of her beliefs and morals are hardly contingent upon a photograph taken when she was a teenager. While the pictures are not something you’d see in Sunday school, they are also not any more pornographic than a Victoria’s Secret catalogue. The desperate attempt to discredit Prejean’s character is little more than laughable. I’m not telling anyone to “go easy” on her; by all means fire away. However, I am asking her left-wing critics to attack her argument, not her career.
On a side note: the media fracas over Prejean is a distraction from the genuine issue needing resolution at hand. Rather than confront her arguments, her reputation is scoured for any inconsistency. It happens on both sides. Conservatives are called hateful and bigoted. Republican hacks call anyone who disagrees with their military adventurism “unpatriotic”. Their tireless refrains are nauseating.
Frankly, I don’t really care how much Joe Biden doesn’t give to charity (there’s not much there to talk about anyhow) when he’s so generous with taxpayer welfare. I don’t care if Obama pushes his daughters to private school with one hand and signs bills stifling efforts to bolster private education with the other. It does demonstrate a measure of hypocrisy and lack of integrity and is indicative of character faults. That’s all; it doesn’t mitigate the substance of their arguments. The cases against over redistribution of wealth and the government monopoly in education still need to be articulated.
I’d like to see an end to the name-calling and political hacks trying to make fools of leaders. Both parties are guilty of stirring that pot. However, Tocqueville reminded the young America that democracy becomes oppressive when conformity is forced upon a culture. Only one side of the political aisle can be accused of doing just that; attempting to trivialize the opinions of many Americans in an effort to mold them into more “progressive” humans.
“Perez” said that he wanted Prejean to represent him in the pageant. Well, she’s beautiful, talented, and will likely have a future doing something productive and worthwhile…not quite representative of a fruity Hollywood leech who makes his wage spouting inane and worthless gossip about meaningless lives. She was better off losing than representing the likes of him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Good one Steve. I am totally in agreement with the meaninglessness of hypocracy when it comes to the realm of arguements about ideas.
Kinda reminds me of something else I read tonight:http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/cwinecoff/2009/05/04/denied-bigotry-of-the-obamatrons/#more-113614
*hipocrisy
Loved the article Dan, thanks for the suggestion. I admire the writer's intellectual honesty. He's a vanishing breed I'm afraid.
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/44615352.html?elr=KArksc8P:Pc:U0ckkD:aEyKUiacyKUUr
Speaking of Tocqueville.
the good part is that in the long run this stuff makes conservatives sharper...jonah goldberg says conservatives in college "swim upstream," and have to always think out and defend their answers. whereas if you just answer "yes" to "do you support gay marriage?" "do you oppose the war in Iraq?" "do you support more money to aids in africa?" "is Islam a beautiful religion?" the media/academia doesn't challenge you as much.
George Will isn't ALWAYS right, but man is he good. I loved that article Dan. Also, in the paragraph just prior to his initial reference to Tocqueville, he quotes a professor. A Dr. Paul Rahe of none other than Hillsdale College. That made me smile.
He was going to teach a class the 2nd semester of my senior year with the title: "Soft Despotism", but it required we read "Democracy in America" in its entirety...as a prerequisite. I sheepishly passed on that particular class in favor of "Mathematical Economics".
Heh, nobody's ALWAYS right. Posted for the Tokeville reference and because I thought it was quite well written.
Post a Comment