Topless Photos Of Christian Miss California Surface

May 5, 2009

topless-carrie-prejeanOh hypocrisy, you know no bounds.

Let me start by saying that I don’t think Ms. Prejean is rabidly anti-gay and I think the pro-gay population’s time would be better spent focusing on someone else.

That said, Joe.My.God. reminds us of this little nugget:

1 Timothy 2:9: I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair [extensions] or gold [highlights] or pearl [necklaces] or expensive [lingerie] clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

And, as always, I think Dan Savage says it best:

And, yes, I’m generally pro toplessness. But if “biblical values” are the standard by which Carrie Prejean wants to judge others—and limit their rights—then she should be judged by the same standard and called out if she fails to adhere to those same biblical/traditional values. And if it turns out she’s just another bible-thumping hypocrite—just another Christian bigot who obsesses over what the bible has to say about me while conveniently ignoring what the bible has to say about her—then she deserves to be outed.

NBC is reporting that Prejean is claiming she was a teenager in the photos (that makes it more acceptable?) and that they are standard photos for anyone with a modeling career.

The, which leaked one of the six photos they claim to have, said the first one (above) is the most tame.

Miss USA contestants are contractually prohibited from being photographed in a state of “partial or total nudity” (um, swimsuit competition, anyone?) and crowns can be revoked for photos that were taken years before a contestant’s pageant. (Vanessa Williams had to surrender her 1984 crown for photos taken in 1982.)

I think the more we attack this bimbo the more the religious right is going to embrace her and herald it as another example of gays attacking “religious freedom.”

It will be interesting to see what NOM does with this, since they’ve already distanced themselves from her once before, after they put her in one of their ads, that is.

MSNBC’s David Shuster Takes On NOM’s Brian Brown; Asks If He’s A Closet Case

May 2, 2009

Borderline inappropriate but oh. so. awesome.

Asked Shuster (at the 3:40 mark):

The only way a gay or lesbian couple, Brian, could be a threat to my marriage or to yours, is if you really fear that maybe somehow they’ll get involved in your marriage. I don’t fear that. Do you worry that maybe, I don’t know, somehow you’re attracted to the gay couple down the street and somehow that will affect your marriage?

Muwhahahahahaha! Shuster for the win!

While NOM’s ads are complete garbage, you have to admit that Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown are pretty damn good in interviews.

Syracuse’s Post-Standard Newspaper Calls For Marriage Equality

April 23, 2009

More good news on the NY marriage equality front:

First: Paterson introduces a gay-marriage bill.
: Word that Republicans will be allowed to “vote their conscience.”
My home-city newspaper has come out in support of marriage equality!

syracuse_nyThe editorial, from the heart of the state, calls marriage equality “a civil right” and draws considerable strength from  the lies and fear-mongering of the recently launched National Organization for Marriage.

The National Organization for Marriage says the best argument against gay marriage is that “gays and lesbians have a right to live as they choose; they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us.”

That reasoning has many happily married heterosexuals scratching their heads. How, exactly, would granting gays the right to marry adversely affect heterosexual couples? How would it weaken families?

Arguments against gay marriage tend to be based on religious beliefs that marriage is a sacred rite intended solely for a man and a woman. But the legislation proposed by Gov. David Paterson would legalize gay and lesbian participation in civil marriages, not religious ceremonies. The bill specifically states that “no member of the clergy may be compelled to perform any marriage ceremony.”


Likewise, the organization declares on its Web site that gay marriage would result in children being taught that “one-half of humanity — either mothers or fathers — are dispensable, unimportant. … Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let’s not confuse them further.”

The argument is a shameless scare tactic. If anything, legalizing same-sex marriage would provide children with a clearer understanding of — and a greater tolerance for — the immutable fact that some people have different sexual orientations than others.

While New York State as a whole votes reliably Democrat in Presidential elections, many of Upstate’s counties lean Republican. Onondaga County, home to Syracuse, went 58.5% Obama and 39.8% McCain in the 2008 election but its more rural neighbor, Madison County, where I’m from, went to McCain by a hair: 49.4% McCain and 48.5% Obama. (Full map.)

In related news, Paterson recently reversed course and said that instead of supporting the bill for an immediate vote – regardless of its chance for passage – he will defer to State Senate Majority Leader Malcolm Smith to introduce the bill only when its passage can be secured.

While this strategy has obvious advantages, I think I sit in the minority opinion when I say that any action is better than no action. Plus, I’m not sure I want to rely on the “most dysfunctional legislature in the nation” to choose when to provide me my marriage rights.

Related Play Happy posts on:
National Organization For Marriage

David Paterson
New York State

Queerty Compiles Ten Best NOM “Gathering Storm” Responses

April 20, 2009

Comments seem to say that the last two are the funniest, although I love the quote one commenter pulled out of the third video: “A storm is gathering, but we have fear and ignorance to shelter us.”

This vid won second place:

View all the videos, including the winner, here.

Nice work, Queerty.

Frank Rich On The NOM Ad And The Marriage Equality Fight Turning A Corner

April 19, 2009

frank-rich Uber-ally Frank Rich tackles the now-infamous NOM ad in Sunday’s column:

Yet easy to mock as “Gathering Storm” may be, it nonetheless bookmarks a historic turning point in the demise of America’s anti-gay movement.

What gives the ad its symbolic significance is not just that it’s idiotic but that its release was the only loud protest anywhere in America to the news that same-sex marriage had been legalized in Iowa and Vermont. If it advances any message, it’s mainly that homophobic activism is ever more depopulated and isolated as well as brain-dead.


On the right, the restrained response was striking. Fox barely mentioned the subject; its rising-star demagogue, Glenn Beck, while still dismissing same-sex marriage, went so far as to “celebrate what happened in Vermont” because “instead of the courts making a decision, the people did.” Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the self-help media star once notorious for portraying homosexuality as “a biological error” and a gateway to pedophilia, told CNN’s Larry King that she now views committed gay relationships as “a beautiful thing and a healthy thing.” In The New York Post, the invariably witty and invariably conservative writer Kyle Smith demolished a [NOM President] Maggie Gallagher screed published in National Review and wondered whether her errant arguments against gay equality were “something else in disguise.”

Definitely recommend reading the whole thing.

Source: The Bigots’ Last Hurrah (NYT)

2M4M: Ten Reasons Gay Marriage Is Wrong

April 13, 2009, the site National Organization For Marriage (NOM) didn’t think to register for themselves despite naming their anti-gay campaign the unintentionally funny 2M4M, officially launches today.

Here is a list, submitted anonymously to the site, of ten reasons gay marriage is wrong:

  1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
  2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
  3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
  4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
  5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Brittany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
  6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
  7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
  8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in the world.
  9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
  10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.

I love #1. Nothing’s going to get Americans more mobilized than threatening their air conditioning.

More at; Via JMG.

More National Organization For Marriage Ridiculousness

April 10, 2009

This just keeps getting better and better.

Via Joe.My.God., I’ve learned that NOM failed to registered the domain name for their unintentionally hilarious “2M4M” campaign.  So what happened?  Well, some ‘mo snatched that shit up. He just started building the site like five minutes ago but I’m already in love with the mere idea of us owning that site.

Also, there are more responses pouring in:


Related: My original post; The first remix.