
I've been asked a lot this last week about what I thought about Miss California and her answer at the Miss USA pageant. I guess I am considered the local expert on the topic... Anyhow, the biggest question I am asked is did she do the right thing by answering with her real opinion or should she have been more diplomatic and tried to make everyone happy to win the crown... Well let's just say right now you won't ever make everyone happy, so you might as well make sure you make the one person happy that you CAN control: yourself. If someone would have told me back when I was at the Miss USA that I would win if I wore a bikini like everyone else instead of the hideous one-piece they handed me to replace it, it wouldn't have changed my decision. (And if there was ever a time in my life I could have worn a bikini and looked good it was that year!) I knew it didn't represent who I was. I can only hope when posed with the same question, Miss California has a similar response. Winning Miss USA isn't worth it if you have to lie about who you are to get it. (Contractually there are some things you can't control about your Miss USA experience, so you have to hold on to the things you can.)
Now on to a little ranting on the subject.
I'm especially frustrated that in years past, the bible and predominant dictionaries have been used to support the definition of marriage in the courtroom, and for that reason editors of such dictionaries have decided to take things into their own hands and change the definition of the word marriage. It now reads in Webster's Dicitonary:
1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage
Who are they to change the meaning of a word that has been around since the beginning of time? They added the new definition (2) in 2003 and now it's being used on the other side of the court room for their purposes. (Shar, Webster is now on my list!) Who's in charge of the English language here? Webster?
And here's an interesting look at the past. In Webster's 1828 dictionary defined marriage as "instituted by God himself for the purpose of preventing the promiscuous intercourse of the sexes, for promoting domestic felicity, and for securing the maintenance and education of children."
How far have we gotten away from what marriage is supposed to be. Adam and Eve are probably hitting themselves in the forehead saying, "What in the world? Didn't we show them how this all worked?" Now in saying all this, I understand that there are same-sex relationships out there that are probably more stable and healthy than some traditional marriages. Good for you. But you can't go changing the definition of one of the oldest words in the world to fit your lifestyle. Make up a new word to fit your needs and we'll go from there.
I wish sometimes people would listen to what they're saying before they spout off their misdirected morals. I loved it when people said Miss California alienated half of America with her answer and therefore shouldn't be able to represent America as Miss USA. Okay so she alienated half of America... but supported the other half. Had she answered the question with the opposing opinion she would have alienated the other "half of America." So you really can't win here. To those of you out there who are of the first "half of America": You need to realize there are at least two sides to an issue and just because someone doesn't have your opinion doesn't mean they are bigots, racist, prejudice, or hateful people. It means they have a different OPINION. Look up that definition, it's a great word! And did you know it's possible to not agree with someone AND not hate them? Do you really agree with everything that the people you associate with believe? Or do you hate everyone who has a different opinion than you? (Abortion, guns, smoking, seatbelt laws, school uniforms... all things that deal with others' rights and personal decisions.) I would hope not, although with the reaction to this silly pageant question, I'm starting to wonder... Maybe that's why you think people of a different opinion are filled with so much hate, because you are. I'm not entirely sure why you're reaction is filled with so much hate toward someone you're saying is wrong for being filled with hate. Are you not treating her with the same disrespect you are accusing her of having? Why do you insist on making people bad and hateful if they don't agree with you? And since when is it people with morals, standards and values are the bad guys? And to the people in the audience who booed her and the unprofessional judge who later bad-mouthed Miss California because her answer wasn't what he wanted to hear: Grow up and become American. We are allowed to believe as we want according to our morals. Thank heavens there are still some people who have them! So she thinks marriage is between a man and a woman. At least she has an opinion and could express it with poise and dignity. (Dignity, there's anther good word to look up unless they've changed the definition of that one too.) What is this world coming to? Even if you don't have the same political views, here in America we're mostly Christian and it's hard to mess up the interpretation of Isaiah 5:20 "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" We are told in the last days people will call evil things good and good things evil. I hate to say it, but Miss California just fulfilled a prophecy written thousands of years ago. Way to go Miss C!
I was a little annoyed with the link on the main page of the official site to the Miss California USA pageant. The link said, "Official statement regarding miss ca usa 2009 final answer controversy" What's the controversy? That she had an opinion or that she had an opinion different than yours? Really?? So is that the new definition of controversy? An opinion different than your own? (Only one of the many definitions you're trying to change...) Then the world is up for a lot more frivolous controversies. For your information here's what the statement says:
I am proud of Carrie Prejean’s beauty and placement at the 2009 MISS USA pageant. I support Carrie’s right to express her personal beliefs even if they do not coincide with my own. I believe the subject of gay marriage deserves a great deal more conversation in order to heal the divide it has created.
No more of a divide than any heated political issue that has two or more sides. Again, welcome to America.
Okay so I went way off on this one. But I need your help with one more thing. After my year at the Miss USA, it was amazing the amount of attention I got for being the only one in a one-piece swimsuit. Who would have thought that would be a controversy that year? Boy the world has really changed.
(Thank heavens you-tube wasn't around back then!) But I got so many letters from people all over the United States saying how cool they thought it was and thanking me for being a good example. Those letters meant the world to me even though I had no idea who they were from. So all of you who were disturbed by the hate-media Miss California received because she actually has beliefs and stood up for them, I ask you to join with me in writing her a letter and letting her know there are more people out there that are proud of her than despise her. We just don't make the noise the others do. Send your letters to:Carrie Prejean
c/o K2 Productions
P.O. Box 691700
Los Angeles, CA 90069
or it's even easier to write an email to her through
http://www.sdcc.edu/Email.aspx?emp=carrie_prejean
We may not make it on the Today show or MSNBC (where Nora O'Donnell let Judge Hilton trash her) but we can let her know we are on her side and that she has greater things in life to accomplish than just the Miss USA pageant.


