Carrie Still Carries the California Crown

The various sections of the Los Angeles Times, including their news, opinion, and entertainment blogs, have been all over the Carrie Prejean/Miss California USA situation. Considering the paper's editorial board has vehemently advocated marriage neutering and their hard coverage has definitely been biased in support of marriage neutering, and that the paper focuses on the entertainment industry in general, it comes as no surprise that they would be all over this story. I found a couple of pieces I wanted to discuss. The first is this article by Carla Hall. In the description under the headline, it refers to Prejean as a "symbol of the anti-same-sex-marriage movement", instead of, say, a defender of tradition, or, say "someone who agrees with the President of the United States of America". That language is repeated in the first line of the article (and throughout), before we move on to this...

What got Prejean into trouble with the pageant organizers was not her answer to the question, but rather her failure to perform her duties as Miss California after she emerged as a darling of the anti-same-sex-marriage movement.

That's what some of the organizers have claimed. Interesting that the Los Angeles Times prints it like it is fact. Do they really buy it?

The paper even ran this editorial, seemingly about Trump's ability to get attention. But it starts out with...

[The rest is below the fold if you care to read it.]

Behold Carrie Prejean, every inch a product of the new beauty pageant aesthetic. Compliments of the Miss California USA organization, her breasts have been enhanced, and now, compliments of the religious right, her mildly anti-gay-marriage sentiments have been augmented as well.

Notice that, even though a majority of California's participating voters adopted the California Marriage Amendment, the editorial board is trying to make seem as though only the "religious right" supports preserving marriage. Prejean's comments are erroneously framed as "anti-gay-marriage".

The editorial throws in another mention of breast implants and even drops Anita Bryant's name while going on to correctly note that Trump is a master at getting hype. I wouldn't be surprised if Prejean ends up on the next season of Celebrity Apprentice.

The website is taking comments about the editorial.

"Stubenville" wrote:

I wonder how Ms. Prejean would have been treated had her comments been anti-Semitic in nature rather than opposing equal rights for gays and lesbians? Somehow I doubt Mr. Trump would have kept her around.

Nice try, but you are comparing apples and oranges. Prejean did not disparage "gay" or "lesbian" people in her answer, nor advocate against their equal rights. She simply said that she believed marriage unites the sexes. That should be no more controversial than saying that circles should be round.

If you get there in time, you can leave your own comment.

While Prejean was willing to take the heat, others won't, and the marriage neutering advocates know that. They will take advantage of that. They will continue to demand others tell them where they stand on the issue, and then equate any opposition to marriage neutering they uncover as bigotry, hatred, stupidity, and a personal attack on them in hopes that enough people will simply accept such charges as true, rather than bothering to think the issues through. They will continue to try to frame your opinion on the matter as an attack on their personal relationship and private choices, perhaps even as violence, trying to deflect your attention away from the fact that state licensing is done on your behalf and you should have a legitimate say in the matter.