First, the recent runner-up in the Miss USA contest has claimed she lost the number one spot because of her stance on marriage and family. It seems her lack of Political Correctness may have cost her the position. Here is how one news report covers the story:
"Miss North Carolina USA Kristen Dalton was crowned Miss USA 2009 on Sunday, beating out 50 other beauty queens in the live pageant televised from Planet Hollywood Resort & Casino in Las Vegas. But her runner up, Miss California Carrie Prejean, of San Diego, shocked the audience when she answered a question from celebrity blogger Perez Hilton about legalising same-sex marriage. The tall blonde stumbled some before giving an answer that appeared to please the pageant audience. 'We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage,' Prejean said. 'And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offence to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised'."
It seems Miss California was well on the way to winning the contest, but her refusal to bow to the dictates of the PC crowd and the homosexual activists has cost her big time. Indeed, one of the judges, Perez Hilton, admitted as much. He said her answer "alienated millions of gay and lesbian Americans, their families and their supporters. She lost it because of that question. She was definitely the front-runner before that."
And Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, also came out with a moonbeam PC statement: "As co-director of the Miss California USA, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman."
While I have no great interests in beauty pageants, I do have a great interest in the war against marriage, and the attempts by radical homosexuals to enforce their agenda in every conceivable arena. The way things are going, it will soon become a crime in the West to simply assert your preference for heterosexual marriage.
The second case involves yet more sexualisation and exploitation of the young. It seems that a long-standing children's favourite has decided to do a soft-porn photo shoot, totally unconcerned as to the impact this might have on her large fan base of very young children.
A news account puts it this way: "Former Hi-5 star Kellie Crawford has angered family groups by posing near-naked in a men's magazine. The one-time favourite for millions of kids posed in a lacy bra and briefs for the cover of this month's Ralph."
She evidently has just recently left Hi-5 after a ten-year stint with the group. Critics point out that she is a 'former' child entertainer, so what is the big deal? But five-year-olds are not too good at making the connection between former and current role models. To see her spread out on the cover of a raunchy men's magazine is certainly not sending great messages to young children.
Crawford said "I did it for myself to remind myself that I am a woman". To reminds herself she is a woman? You mean billions of women who have not gone for soft-porn modelling are not able to recognise and affirm who they are as females? Is appearing as a hunk of meat to satisfy male lust the only way you can prove yourself to be a woman?
As Women's Forum Australia spokeswoman Melinda Tankard Reist said, "It's an abuse of her position with tens of thousands of little girls looking up to her. The fact she's posed on a cover is particularly problematic because magazines like Ralph are on shop shelves at kiddy eye level."
Julia Gale, spokeswoman of Kids Free 2B Kids also questioned Crawford's actions: "Older teenage girls will wonder why performers feel the need to pornify their image. They are damaged and harmed by messages that they need to sexualise or there is no success."
The last example of sexual suicide concerns a US school teacher who raped some of her students. The press provides this story: "A former teacher has been convicted of abducting one of her students, age 10, and raping him and his 15-year-old brother. Both sides stipulated the facts in Pierce County Superior Court, and Judge D. Gary Steiner convicted 33-year-old Jennifer Leigh Rice of first-degree kidnapping with sexual motivation, first-degree child molesting and two counts of third-degree child rape. Facing more than 25 years in prison, Rice remains in jail pending sentencing June 5."
While this may be an extreme story, it seems on a regular basis now we are hearing reports of school teachers having either forced or volitional sexual encounters with their students. People my age do not recall hearing concerns by their parents about school teachers being sexual predators.
Yet in a highly sexualised age, such activities are becoming far too frequent. Indeed, these three examples (and many more could be cited) are illustrative of the fact that modern Western culture has become one big sexual cesspool.
We are inundated with all things pornographic, while the institutions of marriage and family continue to take a beating. In 1956 Harvard sociologist Pitirim Sorokin wrote these words: "This sex revolution is as important as the most dramatic political or economic upheaval. It is changing the lives of men and women more radically than any other revolution of our time. . . . Any considerable change in marriage behavior, any increase in sexual promiscuity and sexual relations, is pregnant with momentous consequences. A sex revolution drastically affects the lives of millions, deeply disturbs the community, and decisively influences the future of society" (The American Sex Revolution).
Or as Will and Ariel Durant wrote in The Lessons of History (1968): "The sex drive in the young is a river of fire that must be banked and cooled by a hundred restraints if it is not to consume in chaos both the individual and the group."
We are seeing the bitter fruit of a world gone mad concerning all things sexual. The examples provided here are merely the tip of the iceberg. As the experts have warned, just how long can a society last that is not able to constrain the sexual impulse and protect the institutions of marriage and family? Time will tell.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25358661-5012980,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8009359.stm?a
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25355713-661,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25364043-5001021,00.html