So, Miss California agrees with President Obama…

OK, on one hand I can’t believe that I am commenting on this matter, yet on the other hand I find one aspect of it fascinating.

The news programs (desperate as they are) are all a twitter (can we say that in the age of Twitter?) about whether or not Miss California lost the Miss USA pageant because of her pro-marriage answer to the question put to her by one of the judges (a particular human who needs no more publicity than he already has).  Apparently that judge is saying on various media forums that her position absolutely did disqualify her, and some others are saying so, as well, because they say that if she personally disagreed with the idea of so-called homosexual “marriage” she should not really have said so and that she should have created a more neutral answer.  (This is, of course, just as much nonsense as saying that if she agreed with homosexual “marriage” she shouldn’t have said so and should have given a more neutral answer.)

Some are also criticizing her for using her answer to make a political point — but, of course, the judge was the one using the opportunity to make a political point while she, on the other hand, was simply answering the question given to her about what she believes, so that makes no sense at all.  When did sincerely and honestly answering questions put to you begin to equate to political activism?  And would she be accused of “making a political point” if she had answered in the opposite direction?

All of this said, the idea that she should not have disagreed with homosexual “marriage” publicly, regardless of her personal stand on the issue, and that her position disqualifies her for being Miss USA does intrigue me.  Because isn’t that the stated position of our new President, Barack Obama?  If such a position disqualifies her to win a pageant, how does that speak to the one actually making decisions for our country?  Is the real issue that leaders should be willing to be hypocritical and state things differently than they believe?  Is this why Miss California fails to get a pass, but the President succeeds?

On one hand, this is a non-issue.  A beauty pagaent is not the end of the world, and that particular judge used up his undeserved 15 minutes of fame a long time ago.  On the other hand, the issue of “practiced pretense” and the public’s acceptance of — if not desire for — hypocrisy on the part of its chosen leaders does fascinate me. The Bible prophesies a time when we will lack any leaders worth having and that people of integrity, character, and fortitude will be hard to find.

The one thing that I think would have made all of this more interesting would have been seeing Miss California answer the question by saying, “I take the same stand as the new President of our great country and believe like he does that marriage should be preserved.  He’s really set the example for all of us in finding a balance between being a welcoming, tolerant society and yet maintaining important boundaries concerning right and wrong, and I admire him for that.”  While I wouldn’t have agreed with such an answer in all its details, it would have essentially communicated the same thing, and I think the talk among the talkikng heads and chattering classes on TV today would contain a much more interesting element to them.

8 thoughts on “So, Miss California agrees with President Obama…

  1. Brian Maxwell

    So, you have a direct criticism against Mr. Obama. I wonder Mr. Smith- how many of your former blog entries contained a direct criticism against the former President, Mr. Bush? Not an indirect reference, but a direct reference? I imagine there should be many since Mr Obama has only been in office 100 days vs 8 years of Mr Bush. Yes, I am sure you had many direct critiques of Mr. Bush. Right? Because scripture says ALL leaders are sinful, not just Democrats. Yes, I am sure you had many entries because if not, then the “h” word has to be invoked and that would not be good.

  2. Howdy, again, Brian —

    First, take a breath. Second, I can’t locate the “direct criticism” that you seem so excited about. Perhaps you can point it out for me?

    (FWIW: Actually, I did directly criticize some hypocrisy on the part of the former President in a post, and though the comment makes it clear about whom I am speaking (at least to me), I did not mention his name because I thought referring to him in the way I did added artful impact to the comment. Maybe because I referred to him without using his name you do not consider this a “direct criticism” — well, c’est la vie. But what I actually said of him there is harsher than anything you may imagine I have said of the current President here, I suspect.)

    And, yes, all leaders are sinful: Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Martians, Unicorn worshipers, what have you. I’m not sure how it relates to your point, but I’m happy to agree with you.

    Please forgive me for saying so if I am out of turn, Brian, but you really do seem to have some issues. You only seem to speak up when (A) you’re happy because you believe I have criticized Republicans, or (B) you’re unhappy because you believe I have criticized Democrats. While you seem to be upset by a bias you imagine (and, oddly, seem to hope exists) in what I write, as far as I can tell you display a stronger bias in your comments than anything I have written. Are you simply upset that the political bias you perceive (real or imagined) in any given Church of God differs from your own bias?

  3. Deano

    Politicians are politicians and people are people, or the second half of that might be better stated, “the public is the public”. The leaders tell the public what it wants to hear – both, probably while it is being said, understanding that most of what is being said is hogwash. Itching ears for the evil imaginations of its own heart, for which hypocrisy is the price. Thus, ever increasingly, is mankind. Me thinks.

  4. Well said, Deano.

    I’m proud of Miss California for sticking by her beliefs. The biggest event in her young life, and she’s willing to risk everything by being honest? What character.

  5. Pingback: Marriage is between a man and a woman? Shocking! « Thoughts En Route

  6. Pingback: An actual request for hypocrisy? « Thoughts En Route

  7. Pingback: Hoping your President is a liar? Really? « Thoughts En Route

What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.