The Miss California Brouhaha(HA!)

So Miss California does not support gay marriage. And suddenly that's a politically incorrect position. Actually it's the exact same as that of our President, and a (decreasing) majority of the people in the United States. So her position is politically correct. Perhaps, in the gay-friendly beauty queen world that's not the case, as Perez Hilton pointed out. But nationally, she's in the majority.

What's more fascinating is her defense of the issue. On the Today show, she stated her stance is "biblically correct". Forgive me my pious friends, but is it biblically correct to be parading around on stage in a bikini? To eat shellfish? To get a divorce? To do a myriad of things that is legal under civil law but, but maybe not (depends on your interpretation) under religious law? There is no standard interpretation of religion, religious folks selectively believe certain passages and conveniantly ignore others. Some sins are greater than others. Divorce is mentioned much more than homosexuality, although the popular belief is that homosexuality is worse than divorce. Either way, even with a standardization of a belief system, whether something is biblically, torah-ly, kornaically or whatever-ly correct is completely irrelevant in a republic. Move to Iran or the independent Catholic country known as the Vatican state, then you have a case. But not here. Not that people are not allowed to have views like Miss California. But if we have took everything in the Bible and applied it to law, then we might start looking even worse than Iran. If Iran took everything in the Koran and applied it literally, Iran might look even worse than that. There's a reason we bristle when we hear that Muslim countries apply Sharia-law, and Christian version of such law is just as bad in principle. There's a civil litmus test for our policy, but not a religious one. Even the most religious among us can acknowledge that simple fact.