The “problem” with this post is that it DOESN’T BELONG HERE. This is not a “religious” site. If you want to post this stuff somewhere, go find a religion/theology site. My guess is that it wouldn’t be received much better there than here though for different reasons.

There hasn’t been much in the way of “nastiness” about this diary in the comments section. The nastiness was pretty well relegated to the diary itself.

Anyway, the whole point of the irritation about this thing is that the left is launching and carrying through major attacks on our freedoms and you’re focusing on Carrie’s appearance in a bathing suit. If that’s really where your priorities are you really don’t belong here. Actually, if that’s really the case I’m not sure you belong anywhere.

Good riddance.

I, for one, disagree with your post.

“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

Left-Wingers are never happier than when they get to point the finger and self-righteously accuse the other side of that most greatest of sins; “hypocrisy!”

The problem, of course, in this case, is that this young lady (if she is indeed young or a lady … or even female - she certainly is no conservative and is quite frankly, hard to believe as someone with much more than a fleeting relationship with religion) is really unhappy with Carrie Prejean for standing up against gay marriage.

So the next thing is to attack her personally (Rule 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.) and play the hypocrite card by accusing Prejean of failing to live up to their imagination of her Christian standards.

Then comes the attempt to conflate everything together.

You see, Prejean is a hypocrite for opposing gay marriage. Why? She wore a bikini on stage and she has made a (solo) sex tape. David Vitter is a hypocrite for opposing gay marriage. Why? He slept with prostitutes. John Ensign is a hypocrite for opposing gay marriage. Why? He had an affair …

One wonders what one (e.g. gay marriage and wearing swimsuits in public) has to do with the other. According to Lefties like this poster, one can’t do both - or else one is a “hypocrite”. Strangely enough, they’re completely oblivious to the fact that they’re not making a good argument for themselves by implicitly arguing that people who visit prostitutes and adulterers should naturally support gay marriage.

Now if Prejean, Vitter, Ensign, etc. were married to people of the same sex while opposing gay marriage then I’d be more inclined to pay attention to the charges of hypocrisy.

Otherwise … I’m just amused by it.

I don’t see where all nude photography is immoral. The human body is a beautiful, wonderful thing–why wouldn’t we want to see it? Bear with me–I’m not saying that Playboy spreads are beautiful and artistic, but nude artwork can be done in a way that doesn’t violate our moral fabric.

Hence my Lewis excerpt yesterday.

And of course, that mark is the set-up for the classic joke:

How many radical feminists does it take to change a light bulb?

cyder88 doesn’t speak for me any more than Carrie Prejean does. Temper tantrums don’t work for my grandsons and they’re much younger. She ought to know better.

Twice I asked her if she was a lefty troll. The only answer she gave was to attack anybody who disagreed with her/it. Case closed as far as I’m concerned.