Miss Beverly Hills thinks gay people should “surely be put to death”
February 23rd, 2010
This is Lauren Ashley, the Miss Beverly Hills contestant to the Miss California USA beauty pageant. Yes, that Beverly Hills. I kid you not.
And following in the shoes of Carrie Prejean, Lauren wants everyone to know that she too opposes marriage equality for gay people. But if we take her at her words, she wouldn’t stop there. (Fox News Pop Tarts)
“The Bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman. In Leviticus it says, ‘If man lies with mankind as he would lie with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death and their blood shall be upon them.’ The Bible is pretty black and white,” Ashley told Pop Tarts.
“I feel like God himself created mankind and he loves everyone, and he has the best for everyone. If he says that having sex with someone of your same gender is going to bring death upon you, that’s a pretty stern warning, and he knows more than we do about life.”
Ashley, who says, “There’s no hate between me and anyone” doesn’t explain whether this “bringing of death upon you” also applies to her “lot of friends that are gay”, or only to those who want to get married. Somehow I just don’t think she’s ever really thought about what it would mean to live according to Leviticus.
I’m sure that this poor foolish girl is all delighted that she’s found an issue that will give her an additional minute and a half of fame. And no doubt she’ll try and latch onto Carrie’s martyrdom when she doesn’t make the first cut.
But sadly for Lauren, she does not yet know the cost of selling your soul to a campaign of discrimination. And she doesn’t realize that she doesn’t quite have what it takes to headline a Family Values dinner. No one is impressed that you’re a champion of virginity when, well, they can’t fantasize about taking it from you.
This commentary is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect those of other authors at Box Turtle Bulletin.
November 17th, 2009
I dislike Carrie Prejean as much as anyone. She’s stupid, bratty, and immature. I want to throw a pie in her face. But the response to her CNN interview and her comment in Christianity Today — “I don’t see anywhere in the Bible where it says you shouldn’t get breast implants” — has me questioning the tone of the attacks from the gay community (and liberal folks).
Many gays call her a “slut” because of the sex tapes she made, the pictures, and her boob job. But should we? At the heart of the “slut”-bomb we keep dropping on Carrie is the assumption that women should be pure, that having too many sex partners makes you a skank and that all this behavior makes her bad. But I don’t think that. I don’t think sex outside of marriage is wrong, or that sex with many people — even at the same time! — is wrong. I might not personally videotape myself in sexual poses or take racy pictures (maybe I just need some confidence?), but I see these things as natural expressions of sexuality. She’s a bad person because she’s a bigoted fame-monger, not because she rubbed herself the wrong way.
You might say it’s about hypocrisy, but if so, let’s call her a hypocrite.
This brings me to another point: Carrie’s right when she says the Bible doesn’t say you can’t get implants. Despite being a dyed-in-the-wool atheist, I’ve often wondered why being Christian means, for some, that you repress sexual desire and abandon all concern for your appearance. Technical terms: vanity, lust. Carrie’s certainly a hypocrite when it comes to the Christian values of people she’s representing, but aren’t there there are versions of Christianity that make room for you to be human?.
What’s less “Republican”, making a sex tape or supporting marriage equality?
November 16th, 2009
That’s the question that Meghan McCain, daughter of Sen. John McCain, has for the Republican Party.
Meghan has been feeling the ire of those within the Party who think that her ideological support for equality disqualifies her as a Republican. So she’s a bit pissed about the priorities of some of the stalwart conservatives who don’t like her but welcome Carrie Prejean with open arms.
After watching several of Prejean\’s media appearances this week, it was not her incredibly uncomfortable threat to walk out on Larry King that had me most unnerved; it was actually her appearance on Sean Hannity’s show. This was Prejean\’s first stop on her book publicity tour, and when the sex tape came up, he proceeded to ask her if she was “in love with her boyfriend at the time that she made [it].” I\’m sorry, why would being in love matter when it comes to filming yourself in a sexual context?
Meghan notes the hypocrisy of those who are quick to forgive you of anything if you are adequately anti-gay.
The problem I have with my fellow Republicans is why gay marriage is the trump card in any situation. It seems that as long as you are against gay marriage, any scandal in your life can be overlooked or overcome. When you are in favor of it, however—and I have been very vocal about my support—that position defines you.
Sometimes I wonder if I were against marriage equality, whether it would make it easier for some Republicans to accept my place within this party. I have to constantly remind people of my pro-life, pro-small government stance because the only view that seems to matter is the fact that I believe my gay friends should have the same right to one of our founding ideals—that all men are created equal with certain inalienable rights. I think if Republicans truly believe in keeping government out of our lives—that should include not dictating who one can marry.
Many believe that it was Carrie Prejean\’s anti-gay marriage views that cost her the Miss USA pageant earlier this year. My question is: When it comes to Republicans, is your position on gay marriage what determines your fate within the party?
Personally, I think the party needs to ask itself whether it wants to be a party that the Meghan McCains of the country can join or whether it wishes to only appeal to those with the perception, character, and intellect of Carrie Prejean.
Carrie Prejean’s Closeup
November 13th, 2009
Ah yes. It seems like only yesterday:
- Peter LaBarbera hailed Carrie Prejean as one who “sought to please God rather than politically-correct man.”
- Randy Thomasson gushed that she “is the #1 voice in America educating people that there is a war against free speech and against marriage.”
- Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily called Prejean “an example for all believers torn between conformity to the world’s standards and honoring God’s standards.”
- The National Organization for Marriage’s Maggie Gallagher signed her up as spokesperson for the organization, saying she was, “very proud of [Carrie] and look forward to cheering from the sidelines about all the important things she will accomplish and all the people she will inspire to speak truth to power.”
- Brian Brown boasted that “She\’s a young woman of great beauty who chose truth over the glittering tiara that Hollywood offers… her values are in the right place.”
I guess that “right place” must be her chicha, if her 30 nude photos and eight sex tapes are any indication:
On one tape Carrie is wearing just a flowing white blouse as she touches her own body in an alluring manner. Carrie can be heard moaning on a few of the tapes.
In her newly released book Carrie wrote, “God gave us our bodies, and it\’s perfectly right that we use them in ways where we can give glory to God by making our bodies, our temples of the Holy Spirit, strong and fast.”
Carrie Prejean on CNN, Refuses Questions From Gay Viewers
November 12th, 2009
Because we really don’t exist if she can’t speak to us.
By the way, that sex tape she made when she was seventeen? Her ex-boyfriend, who provided the tape, says that she was twenty at the time, and not the innocently naive teen she claimed to be. The tapes were made in 2007. That’s the year she was competing in the Miss California pageant, placing first runner up. She won Miss California the following year and was awarded with a boob job.
Carrie’s porn loses her a gig with NJ “family defenders”
November 7th, 2009
Carrie’s boob enhancements and nipples on display were overlookable offenses for the New Jersey Family Policy Council. She was scheduled to be their headliner for a Friday night fundraiser.
But it appears that in making the tape, Carrie screwed herself.
Carrie Prejean will not be defending traditional families in New Jersey tonight. The dethroned Miss California USA was scheduled to be the headliner at a Defenders of the Family fundraiser, but she was removed from the roster following news that her XXX solo sex tape essentially nullified her religious discrimination lawsuit against the Miss USA pageant.
It will be interesting to see how well sales go for her new book, Still Standing, the untold story of my fight against gossip, hate, and political attacks, which is to be released Monday.
p.s. Amazon already has a previewable copy. From what I could tell of the first few pages, it is breathless cotton-candy fluff. Perhaps it would have been a better choice to run it as a serial in the National Enquirer.
Carrie Prejean’s Behavior is Disgusting
November 5th, 2009
Yesterday I was chided for calling opposite-marriage loving, NOM representing, values voter speaking, good ol’ Christian girl Carrie Prejean a skanky slut. Well, actually looking back, I said that the God she imagined had anointed her as his spokesman would call her a skanky slut, but nevertheless point well taken.
So today I’ll just say that I have it from a very good source that Carrie Prejean’s behavior is disgusting.
Who is the source, you ask? Why, it’s none other than Carrie herself. (TMZ)
When the video started playing, Carrie’s first reaction was “that’s disgusting” … and Carrie denied it was her.
Then, the camera angle changed … and panned up to her face. She was caught red-handed … so to speak.
Carrie was rendered speechless and immediately began talking with her lawyer. We’re told it took about 15 seconds for Carrie to drop her $1 million dollar demand.
Now I certainly can’t speak for all of our readers, but if this video showed what I think it showed, then I am sure that there are a number of the fellas that would agree with Carrie that, “Ewwww, that’s disgusting.”
Carrie Prejean, Even Sluttier Than You Thought
November 4th, 2009
It seems Carrie Prejean’s pretenses of superior moral character are as fake as her boobs or the National Organization for Marriage’s advertising.
Carrie Prejean demanded more than a million dollars during her settlement negotiations with Miss California USA Pageant officials — that is, until the lawyer for the Pageant showed Carrie an XXX home video of her handiwork.
The video the lawyer showed Carrie is extremely graphic and has never been released publicly. We know that, because TMZ obtained the video months ago but decided not to post it because it was so racy. Let’s just say, Carrie has a promising solo career.
Why, oh why, does this not surprise me?
Now for those of you who may have, in some moment of passion, pulled out the video camera to document your eternal love, I’m not criticizing your personal cinematic endeavors.
Unless, of course, you want to preach at me about “opposite marriage” or pretend that you have a hotline to God. Because if the creator of the universe has some special message for mankind that he wants to reveal through you, he’s probably first going to suggest that it might be more “biblically correct” if you weren’t a skanky slut.
The only down side to all of this is that Charles LiMondri, the San Diego Attorney / Anti-gay Activist is getting his legal fees paid.
Carrie Sued for her… um… Enhancements
October 27th, 2009
It appears that Carrie Prejean, the face of the anti-gay marriage movement, just can’t help but be a national joke.
I’m not saying that she’s a blithering idiot. I’m not calling her a dunce. I’m not suggesting that she lends credibility to every blond joke I’ve ever heard. I’m just pondering whether her handlers have properly considered the possible ramifications of yet another public reminder that Carrie’s life in the recent past does not exactly align with the frilly necked, long sleeved Carrie that value voters so adore.
Because, if so, then they should have done a better job vetting. Cuz, really, if you cater to the Jesus Loves a Virgin crowd, you probably don’t much benefit from headlines that scream:
Miss California Officials to Carrie Prejean: You Owe Us for Those Boobs!
It turns out that Carrie forgot – in her desire to support Biblical Marriage – that suing your former employer after they’ve invested money into the contract you breached can result in them suing you right back. (E Online)
K2 Productions, which directs the Miss California USA pageant, has countersued the litigious former beauty queen, requesting that she return the $5,200 it gave her for breast-augmentation surgery.
“Had [Prejean] heeded the guidance of the Gospel of John, who admonished only those who are without sin to cast stones in judgment, she might have avoided this legal battle,” the suit states.
You just gotta love a lawsuit that quotes Scripture at the Holier-Than-Thou crowd.
And it makes me wonder about the priorities of the National Organization for Marriage. If they are willing to shell out millions in advertising campaigns and huge sums in legal fees to fight public disclosure laws, couldn’t they kick out a few paltry thousands to keep Carrie’s boobs out of the press again?
Someone needs to tell Carrie, “Girl, you’re being used. When they no longer have a use for a blond bimbo victim of the evil gays, they will kick you to the curb and you will have no one at all to turn to.”
September 25th, 2009
This year for Halloween you can go as your favorite opposite-marriage loving, values voting, bigger crown coveting skank.
Be careful, though. You don’t want to scare the kiddies.
Prejean’s “Bigger Crown” Still a Crowd Pleaser
September 21st, 2009
Carrie Prejean, former Miss California, was at hand to rally the troops at the far-right Values Voter Summit this weekend. She really should be thankful that the Miss California Pageant removed her from her position, because there’s no way that an organization that seeks to appeal to pageant viewers would ever let a reigning representative get anywhere near that collection of extremist partisans.
Ready with a quick tear, Prejean told how she went from a sure thing winner (though the points were not going her way) to being a big loser. Although it appeared to those living outside her head that she was prattling on incoherently about “opposite marriage”, on the inside she was seeing visions from God.
“As I saw my goals and aspirations flash by me, I knew God had a plan for me… God chose me for that moment. He knew I was strong enough to get through all the junk that I have been through.”
My recollection of the events suggests that this “plan” wasn’t all that evident right away. It didn’t exactly materialize until Maggie Gallagher got Carrie in her grip. But perhaps it’s true; Carrie’s thought process has always proven elusive.
And then, victim that she is, Prejean whipped out her catch phrase, one that was sure to appeal to biblical literalists who can’t wait to be royalty in heaven (though they are not really very specific about who gets to be peasants and serfs).
“Even though I didn\’t win the crown that night,” said Prejean, tearing up, “I know the Lord has so much of a bigger crown in heaven for me.”
And who am I to tell her she’s wrong. After all, the Lord did have much bigger boobs for her down at her plastic surgeon’s.
August 31st, 2009
And she just doesn’t understand why businesses and other sponsors wouldn’t want her face and name attached to their profitability. It must be the fault of the Miss California pageant!!
So she’s suing. (NBC San Diego)
Carrie Prejean, the beauty queen who was stripped of her Miss California crown in June, sued two Miss USA California officials on Monday, claiming that she lost her crown solely for her religious beliefs. She is seeking unspecified damages.
Well, yeah, her religious belief that she doesn’t have to do the job of Miss California or keep in contact with the organization, perhaps.
“Over the past two months, we have worked hard to provide overwhelming evidence that Carrie Prejean did not violate her contract with Miss California USA and did not deserve to have her title revoked by Keith Lewis,” said attorney Charles S. LiMandri*, who is representing Prejean. “We will make the case that her title was taken from her solely because of her support of traditional marriage.”
Oddly enough, on some level he’s right. It was her unauthorized campaigning for National Organization for Marriage, a political organization that “supports traditional marriage”, that cost Carrie her job. If she had stayed in the state and cut ribbons and supported politically neutral endeavors, she’d still be Miss California today.
But Carrie’s a bit too dim to realize that Miss California doesn’t get to be a political advocate for a controversial cause. Most pageants frown on pissing off half of the public. And those who handled her were only interested in advancing their anti-gay advocacy and thought she was the perfect tool.
* if LiMandri’s name sounds familiar, it should. This is the same attorney that hosted a fundraiser for Proposition 8, who represented the San Diego firefighters who were “sexually harassed” by things like “look at the big firemen” at the gay pride parade, and who tried to encourage county clerks to break the law last summer when marriage was legal.
Carrie Prejean Signs Book Deal
July 20th, 2009
Here’s something to add to your Amazon wishlist.
The New Miss California Also Does Not Support Same-Sex Marriage
June 12th, 2009
The Miss California Pageant has replaced one young Christian girl… with another, Teri Farrell.
According to the Kansas City Star,
She’s a Christian. Farrell recently finished recording her first demo CD and performed during a Christian cruise to the Bahamas last summer. Last fall she worked with Christian recording artists, Sonic Flood, on a new CD project.
And the Mercury News is telling us that she doesn’t support marriage equality
In a television interview Thursday, [Tami] Farrell said she believed marriage should be between a man and a woman. But she added: “I don’t think I have the right or anybody has the right to tell somebody who they can or can’t love.”
But it seems that Tami, unlike Carrie, doesn’t think her opinion on the matter is the result of some battle between God and Satan or that she’s qualified to weigh in authoritatively.
But what about gay marriage? Farrell feels it is “hilarious that the world is turning to beauty queens for the answers” on gay marriage, but she didn’t have a strong opinion on either side of the debate.
“I don’t think I have the right, or anyone has the right, to tell somebody who they can or cannot love. I think this is a civil rights issue, and I think the right thing to do is to let the voters decide.”
TMZ has video from CNN in which she says that the decision should be state by state and that she isn’t interested in hooking up with anti-gay organizations.
NOM Needs a Dictionary
June 12th, 2009
Merriam-Webster defines “petition” as a “a formal written request made to an official person or organized body”. Most commonly it is a method by which individuals can show their support of a collective effort to influence a body on a decision.
In other words, a petition has a specific request and a specific audience.
But the National Organization for Marriage isn’t quite sure what the word “petition” means. On their new website Stand With Carrie, they request that visitors “Sign the Petition to Stand with Carrie!” But they provide no petition nor any indication of what “standing with Carrie” might be about:
Carrie Prejean could have had it all, at the price of sacrificing her values. She chose to speak the truth. She chose to Stand Up for Marriage. Now she is paying the price. It’s time for us to Stand with Carrie. Sign up now to let Carrie know you stand with her. And check back soon for more details on how you can help Carrie stand for truth.
Is this directed towards Donald Trump? Does she want her tiara back? Is she now interested in doing the tasks of Miss California? Who knows?
This is a “petition” with neither a request nor a petitionee; this is not a petition at all. Either the designer of the National Organization for Marriage’s new website is not very bright, or that is his opinion about those who visit there.