Miss California Carrie Prejean ostensibly lost the coveted first prize of the Miss USA Pageant due to an honest, but clumsily delivered, response to a question about same-sex marriage equality. Thanks, however, to the juvenile grandstanding and self-aggrandizing douchebaggery of Perez Hilton, she earned a seemingly more lustrous and lucrative crown: spokesperson for the National Organization for Marriage (NOM). NOM, of course, is the political organization made infamous by the countless parodies of its “Gathering Storm” ad, in which one desperate-for-any-work actor warned America in barely perceptible English that a “storm is coming” in the form of full civil equality for gay and lesbian Americans.
Prejean, for her part, has vowed “to do whatever it takes to protect marriage” and the newly crowned queen of “Opposite Marriage” appears in NOM’s newest ad entitled, “No Offense.” She also reminded the nation at a press conference that her contemptibly ill-informed comments at the Miss America contest was “not about being politically correct, but about being ‘Biblically correct.'”
Oops! Heaven, we have a problem.
A recent revelation — and not of the Biblical variety — surfaced this week that the prodigal princess had breast augmentation surgery, approved and funded by the Miss California Organization, just weeks before the Miss USA pageant. One has to wonder how the beauty queen has the credibility and moral standing to speak out against “unnatural” and “un-Biblical” marriage with the same breath that is weighted down by “unnatural” and “un-Biblical” implants filtered through $10,000 worth of “unnatural” capped teeth.
Of course, Princess Prejean has a right to her religious convictions and no one should ever lose a contest over speaking those beliefs in earnest. Miss California also has the right to do whatever she chooses within the privacy of her own bra, but she doesn’t have the right to redefine traditional breasts for the rest of us.
For many thousands of years, across every culture and continent, women have known “traditional” breasts to be those that God — or nature — gave them. To think otherwise flies in the face of millennia of human history and spiritual doctrine. Prejean’s Bible repeatedly reminds us we are made in God’s perfect image while warning us against exchanging the “natural” use of our bodies for those deemed “unnatural.” And, while one could argue the right to privacy and personal freedom are inherent in our nation’s founding democratic principles and that every American has a right to his/her own pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, organizations like NOM — for whom she’s now the spokesperson — Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council repeatedly admonish us that life in America would be better if theology and biblical doctrine were the primary determinant of civil law and personal liberties.
While someone else was footing the bill, Prejean made the choice to defy her God’s “perfect” design and creation of her and to rebel against the intended and “natural” purpose of her mammaries: namely, the nursing of babies rather than the visual attraction sufficient enough to win a vanity contest. Moreover, if her teeth aren’t capped, I’m betting they were braced; and I’d also put money down on the fact that Prejean has, at some point, performed other “unnatural” acts with her organs like chewing gum, wearing eye-glasses, enjoying a Diet Coke or two or… well, you get the idea.
So, Carrie, you may find full civil equality for all Americans to be “unnatural” and not “Biblically correct,” but, frankly, neither are your Jugs for Jesus and your Caps for Christ. “No Offense.”
Brian Normoyle in the Huffington Post
