Dear Tell All: I can't believe that anybody gives credence to a pageant contestant's philosophical views. Why is everyone still obsessed with Miss California's comments at the Miss USA pageant? She said that marriage should be between a man and a woman, which riled up both sides of the debate. Is her opinion worth devoting a single brain cell to?
Dear Ms. Madison: The silliest people in this whole affair are the opponents of same-sex marriage, who rushed to turn Carrie Prejean into a standard bearer. They praised her courage in standing up for her beliefs at last month's Miss USA pageant, and they've been busy defending her from critics - you know, those fascists who believe gay people are human beings entitled to the same rights as everyone else.
If the homophobes want Miss California as a spokesperson, I say: Take her. Her appearance at the pageant didn't exactly establish her credibility. We learned that she attends San Diego Christian College, but it was hard to square Jesus' teachings with the swimsuit and evening-gown competitions. Prejean showed the camera her butt, legs and breasts as if her parts were being judged at a cattle show. Indeed, the judges assessed her flanks and rump with demeaning scores: 9.033 for swimsuit, 9.275 for an evening gown slit all the way up to her pubic hair. (One does have to admire the precision of those calculations. What would it take to add .001 - another eighth-inch on the breast implants?)
It makes sense that someone so willing to be a piece of meat would possess a cow-sized brain. After an hour and a half of inanity (Prejean's activities, we learned, include "playing with my Chihuahua"), Miss California was confronted with a Final Question about same-sex marriage that required perspective and humanity. Her response: "In my country, in my family, I think that I believe that marriage should be between a man 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."
Hey, no offense taken. It's hard to be offended by a piece of meat. But why would the sanctity-of-marriage people want to be represented by one?