Nothing makes me laugh harder than the term "opposite marriage" that has been coined to describe male-female marriage. Only fanatical nutcases could come up with a term to make their objective, plain old ordinary "traditional" marriage, sound like something twisted and perverted. Against "opposite marriage" same-sex marriage sounds like the only sane and reasonable choice!
The problem I see with a lot of fundamentalist christians is that they are unable to justify their ethical thought in any other way than through the Bible. The Bible is a very difficult text to seek for moral truths in. Theologians attempt to do it, but their attempts are almost always called into question by other interpreters.
This Prejean person should probably start looking at some alternate avenues of ethical thought. Something that doesn't rely on interpretation, but instead relies on a cold, hard look at the world, hopefully through the lens of science, law and the ethical tradition.
Which just goes to prove that you shouldn't attempt to be all up on your high horse on the moral high ground with your shirt off. Unless you're Lady Godiva, of course.
@rocknrollunicorn: She says she was raised to believe in "opposite marriage," so that's why she is a homophobe. I have a feeling she was raised to also keep her clothes on, if she was raised in a Christian household. Christianity generally frowns upon pornography (and yes, topless boobie pictures are porn, just not hardcore), so once again this is a classic case of saying one thing and doing another.
@rocknrollunicorn: It really isn't according to my personal ethos, but I'm pretty sure the conservative religion she's using to bash others considers it to be immoral, though.
It's the fact that she's made this from the beginning about her religion and values and attempted to take the moral high ground while she herself has either selectively partaken of those values or completely ignored them in the furtherance of her own fame/vanity/whatever that makes it so hypocritical.
@onestrawplz: @vivianthelibrarian: @Wit is periodically disensouled: Sorry, they are just not one and the same to me. Don't buy it. I am fine with engaging in a discussion on why her views on gay marriage are ridiculous and wrong. But you don't know how she interprets her religion and, frankly, most Christians I know would be more tolerant of topless photos than the comments on this thread are.
I just get tired of people applying their interpretation of Christianity -- when most of them are not Christians -- to other people's actions. This is a sideshow that is predicated on the idea that Christians pretend they don't sin. Most don't actually pretend that.
I'd really rather discuss the original issue. Plus, this is too close to slut-shaming for me to feel good delighting in it.
@rocknrollunicorn: It seems a hell of a cop out for someone to be able to go out and campaign against allowing others the choice to do what she considers a sin and for her to claim that she's not perfect and therefore her own less-than-perfect choices are irrelevant or should be glossed over. It's her legislating her own morality and then declining to be bound by it in turn.
I understand the concept of sin and forgiveness (having grown up Catholic), but I also don't think she's your everyday Christian, here. She partners with NOW and attends a megachurch in San Diego called Rock Church (who have on their own website an admonition that you should dress modestly, so I don't think most of us are off the mark guessing that she shouldn't be posing topless). They claim to believe in the Bible as absolute truth and their mission is to send out an evangelical "army." They are also prepared to see opposition as coming "from the evil one, Satan, who doesn't want anyone to know about God's love." If she was just a member of that church, I wouldn't presume to assume her beliefs, but when she goes out to every pulpit she can find to talk about them, then I don't feel bad about discussing how she measures up to the standards that she's attempting to inflict on the rest of us.
@Wit is periodically disensouled: @vivianthelibrarian: I simply have no interest in entering the murky territory of judging someone else's morality, be it based upon religion or not. It is simpler and more truthful, to me, to say: You are a bigot. This movement you are speaking for is intolerant and that is wrong.
To compare her various "sins" and determine whether or not she's a hypocrite detracts from the basic, in my mind unquestionable, wrongness of her original stated opinion and her subsequent actions defending and furthering it. And since this second round is tied up with her boobs, her sexuality and her femaleness, it all makes me really, really uneasy. I know it makes us all feel superior to be able to point our fingers and cry "hypocrite!" but like I said above, schadenfreude is leaving a dirty taste in my mouth lately.
"I think its great Americans are able to choose one way or another. We live in a land where you can choose naked photography or opposite naked photography. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that naked photography should be between a photographer and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised, and that's how I think it should be - between a photographer and a woman."
She and Palin can have a persecution Olympics. The evil liberal media is trying to destroy you! By using...your own words...and the nudie pics you took willingly. Le Horror!
"But these attacks on me and others who speak in defense of traditional marriage are intolerant and offensive."
Facepalm for stunning lack of perception and self-awareness. She's just so wrapped up in her persecution complex that she just doesn't get it, does she?
I'm suddenly reminded of when Palin wanted to silence the press because in criticizing her, they were "violating (her) First Amendment rights."
@Wit is periodically disensouled: True story: I picked the "Five people I want to punch in the face" on facebook and number one was Carrie Prejean, two was Sarah Palin, and then it was like Voldemort and Jafar. They are basically two-dimensional villans at this point.
@Spacegirl.goes.home: I've learned it, but I'm not going quietly. I have this faint hope that for whatever reason, one day, one of them might have a glimmer of insight into others' lives and recognize their own blatant hypocrisy for what it is. Obviously I am a frustrated optimist.
@Snowbunny: I might've had fantasies of telling off Palin and Voldemort, I'll admit. Not so much Jafar, though - at least he wasn't a hypocrite ;)
So now when you question a person's past behavior you're going right for their religion? Don't pull stupid shit, piss people off, then try to get a rallying cry going by saying their after your religion, honey. It'll just piss off Christians who think you're full of it.
05/05/09
05/05/09
This Prejean person should probably start looking at some alternate avenues of ethical thought. Something that doesn't rely on interpretation, but instead relies on a cold, hard look at the world, hopefully through the lens of science, law and the ethical tradition.
05/05/09
As much as I like seeing some idiot, illiterate blogger coin and use terms like 'slant fucker' and 'for the gays'...
Seriously, though, that site makes me fucking sick.
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
I mean, I'm not really getting this.
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
It's the fact that she's made this from the beginning about her religion and values and attempted to take the moral high ground while she herself has either selectively partaken of those values or completely ignored them in the furtherance of her own fame/vanity/whatever that makes it so hypocritical.
05/05/09
I just get tired of people applying their interpretation of Christianity -- when most of them are not Christians -- to other people's actions. This is a sideshow that is predicated on the idea that Christians pretend they don't sin. Most don't actually pretend that.
I'd really rather discuss the original issue. Plus, this is too close to slut-shaming for me to feel good delighting in it.
05/05/09
I understand the concept of sin and forgiveness (having grown up Catholic), but I also don't think she's your everyday Christian, here. She partners with NOW and attends a megachurch in San Diego called Rock Church (who have on their own website an admonition that you should dress modestly, so I don't think most of us are off the mark guessing that she shouldn't be posing topless). They claim to believe in the Bible as absolute truth and their mission is to send out an evangelical "army." They are also prepared to see opposition as coming "from the evil one, Satan, who doesn't want anyone to know about God's love." If she was just a member of that church, I wouldn't presume to assume her beliefs, but when she goes out to every pulpit she can find to talk about them, then I don't feel bad about discussing how she measures up to the standards that she's attempting to inflict on the rest of us.
05/05/09
To compare her various "sins" and determine whether or not she's a hypocrite detracts from the basic, in my mind unquestionable, wrongness of her original stated opinion and her subsequent actions defending and furthering it. And since this second round is tied up with her boobs, her sexuality and her femaleness, it all makes me really, really uneasy. I know it makes us all feel superior to be able to point our fingers and cry "hypocrite!" but like I said above, schadenfreude is leaving a dirty taste in my mouth lately.
05/06/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
I guess I'm just over schadenfreude. Honestly, it makes me feel dirty.
05/05/09
"Look at the sodomites corrupting me!"
05/05/09
05/05/09
You are intolerant and offensive.
And stop trying to hide behind the Jesus shield all the time. It's gotten old.
05/05/09
Teachers have been fired for "suggestive" photos.
I guess she just ruined her teaching career. I feel no sympathy.
05/05/09
05/05/09
Facepalm for stunning lack of perception and self-awareness. She's just so wrapped up in her persecution complex that she just doesn't get it, does she?
I'm suddenly reminded of when Palin wanted to silence the press because in criticizing her, they were "violating (her) First Amendment rights."
05/05/09
05/05/09
@Snowbunny: I might've had fantasies of telling off Palin and Voldemort, I'll admit. Not so much Jafar, though - at least he wasn't a hypocrite ;)
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09