THE VOICE OF REASON
Prejean

THE SAVAGING OF MISS CALIFORNIA

Beauty pageants!  I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would spend precious time watching one.  They are anachronistic, something from a bygone era that militates against the dignified role of women in American society.

But Carrie Prejean – Miss California and first runner up to Miss USA – has been treated despicably.  She was asked a question in the Miss USA contest about gay marriage, answered it honestly, and has been excoriated by homosexuals and the Looney Left ever since.

Homosexual activist Perez Hilton, who asked the question, publicly proclaimed her a "dumb bitch."  Forever nasty and mean-spirited Keith Olbermann accused her of "going rogue" at the pageant.  Outspoken homosexual newspaper writer Michael Musto called her "dumb and twisted."  Gloria Feldt, a women's rights activist, alluding to Ms. Prejean's reported breast augmentation, declared her in need of a "heart transplant."

Question: Is it permissible to express opposition to homosexual marriage, like Barack Obama and the overwhelming majority of the American people have done, and not be on the receiving end of a billy club used by the left's thought police?  This young woman has been savaged not for attacking anybody, not even for criticizing another point of view, but for honestly answering a question. Unbelievable!

I can understand homosexuals disagreeing with the position that Ms. Prejean articulated.  I can even understand the most activist of that lot screaming over her response. I also figure that Olbermann must do his thing; otherwise, the forty-five people who listen to his broadcast may be without inspiration.  But I find it philosophically mystifying why a feminist would seize upon the opportunity to attack a well-spoken woman for candidly answering a question.  It is indeed ironic.

I guess that we ought not be surprised.  I remember when the pronouncements of Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem were in the forefront of the news. I was a seminarian then, and "feminine theology" was in vogue.  I had feminist classmates who praised the Virgin Mary because "she didn't need a man in order to give birth." Believe it or not, it is true. I regarded their "feminist" assertions as ridiculous then, and I deem them ridiculous now. "Stupid" might be a better word.

Since that memorable moment, feminists have moved to a new extreme of moral absurdity and intellectual vacuity.  As one listens to them today, it is necessary to probe beneath their sweet, but dishonest, euphemisms to the heart of their message.  Their strident promotion of "reproductive freedom" boils down to support for barbarities such as partial-birth abortion and for the requirement that all qualified medical personnel either perform or support the procedure regardless of their conscientious objections to it. The feminist stress upon "diversity" is actually a call for gender preference.  Their apparently humanitarian appeal to "end racism" turns out to signal little more than multiculturalism at all costs.  Their encouraging "lesbian rights" is about re-inventing American culture to provide homosexuality a normative status.

When we examine the "Women's Movement" from its inception in Seneca Falls, New York until now, we can clearly see its sordid underbelly.  Two of its leading protagonists, Cady Stanton and Susan Anthony, were given to racist slurs more than anyone desires to mention. The same spirit of intolerance is now shaping the movement's treatment of Carrie Prejean.

Yesterday a suggestive photograph of Ms. Prejean, at age 17, made its way across cyberspace.  The purpose was to undermine her credibility, to demonstrate that she is a hypocrite and not a Christian after all.  It is a shallow ploy, but feminists sat in silence and watched it happen.  Shades of the last presidential campaign, when Sarah Palin was similarly trashed!

The treatment that Ms. Prejean has received is symptomatic of an authoritarian mindset.  I wish that at least one thoughtful television host would refrain from engaging haters like Gloria Feldt.  It would be far more appropriate in the aftermath of one of her tirades to present her with a big red swastika and then cut her mic.  What better way to address hate speech?

May 6, 2009