The title of the contest is Miss USA -- UNITED being the operable word. So then why should Miss California, Carrie Prejean, be allowed to compete, much less win Runner-Up status after spitting in the face of an entire population of this fine country?
Prejean took some heat for her response to a question about same-sex marriage by the openly-gay celebrity blogger Perez Hilton.
"You can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage," glamor 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 offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."
OK, you've got an opinion, snaps for sticking to it, but "no offense to anybody out there?"
It's offensive to the judge who asked the question. It's offensive to her state of California, which boasts one of the largest gay populations in the country and the state which provided her the platform.
Keith Lewis, who runs the Miss California competition, confirms he was "saddened" by these comments and said that "religious beliefs have no politics in the Miss California family."
It's also offensive to the fashion industry -- widely recognized to be gay-male dominated and a big reason why she's able to attain all that glamour. Respect their fashion, but not their personal lives?
Lastly, it's offensive to the audience, who would expect a Miss USA representative to embody unity -- not division. Not to mention, the young fans struggling with their own sexual identity and lifestyles.
It's a beauty contest. There is nothing beautiful about intolerance.
Interestingly, when given the opportunity to comment on her statement, Prejean said she has "no regrets" and is "happy" with the answer she gave.
So, should she have faked it, or at least prettied it up? Why not? It wouldn't be the first fake asset a Miss USA contestant has ever flaunted.