Perhaps only in a pop culture as demented as America’s could Donald Trump emerge as a reassuring figure in the same-sex marriage debate. Carrie Prejean gave an “honorable answer” to the gay-marriage question at his pageant, pronounced Trump earlier in the week.
Yes, the manner in which Trump defends Carrie Prejean’s opposition to gay marriage is characteristically ludicrous. She suffers persecution because she is “seriously” hot, he says repeatedly. And, yes, having paid plastic surgeons to enhance her now-exposed upper torso, Trump has a fiduciary interest in its future use at his pageants.
But let’s give Trump at least a few points for Jujitsuing gay-marriage activists by invoking Barack Obama’s opposition to it. Citing Prejean’s answer at the pageant, he said, “It’s the same answer that the president of the United States gave.”
The difference is that she actually believes it. Indeed, the “dumb blonde with fake boobs,” as homosexual activists have called her, has provided a more spirited and courageous defense of marriage than many Catholic bishops. They are apparently tied up with other important matters, such as penning memoirs in which they announce their “struggles” with sodomy.
Yep, I’m gay, says retired Milwaukee Archbishop Rembert Weakland in his forthcoming memoirs. Weakland “retired” after it came out that he had “borrowed” $450,000 of the faithful’s money to pay off a male Marquette graduate student who accused him of “date rape,” and now Rembert is poised to discuss the glorious if troubled trajectory of his sexual preference: “how this came to life in my own self, how I suppressed it, how it resurrected again,” as he put it to AP.
No penitential manual labor in obscurity for this Benedictine monk; Rembert is ready for Oprah. The release of and reaction to A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church will, I suspect, satisfy my 2002 prediction on this site:
Expect Weakland to hit the liberal Catholic speaking circuit in the coming years as a “victim” of pre-Vatican II repression. The scandal, we will be told, is not that a successor of the apostles conducted a homosexual affair and raided the resources of the Church to conceal it, but that such a talented homosexual couldn’t serve “openly” in the Church and that the Church’s “hypocrisy” forced him to cover his homosexuality up.
But back to Prejean: How is it that a culture as drenched in depravity as this one could describe her as “disgraced”? Is that even possible anymore? As Trump noted, the culture is settling into “the 21st century.” In other words, kids are too busy “sexting” their friends to care about Prejean’s left breast.
Nevertheless, the sexual revolutionaries at MSNBC, who usually encourage off-the-rails carnality, want to “vomit” over Prejean. Despite presiding over a culture that would probably make the orgy-attending pagans of the past blush, liberals have managed to find a risqué model that revolts them. I haven’t seen the Andrew Sullivans so worked up since Mel Gibson’s “obscene” film about Jesus Christ.
Are we witnessing an outbreak of “heterophobia”? The violent reaction to Prejean’s remarks illustrates once again not only the intrinsically violent character of homosexual activism — it rallies around a sexual act that violates nature, after all — but also its deep fear of fertile, heterosexual women. Carrie Prejean scares the hell out of them.
Perhaps Prejean should apply for protection under Obama’s “hate crimes” statutes. Or has “heterophobia” not yet been added to the list? If not, proud heterosexualist Donald Trump, whose interest in heterosexual marriage before this episode was fitfully displayed by his repeated return to it, could ably take up the cause.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.