She says she was 17!

Oh, poor Miss California! Carrie Prejean posed topless in lacy underpants and now she says the publication of those photos is

an attempt to undermine my reputation and somehow silence me and my beliefs, as if opinion is only a one-way street…… these attacks on me and others who speak in defense of traditional marriage are intolerant and offensive.

Like, c’mon guys, stop being all mean and stuff:

I am a Christian, and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos…"

She’s claiming the semi-nude pictures of her in hot pink lace panties were a mistake–and not just because the underwear is really tacky and ugly. According to her PR rep, sweet little Miss Prejean was talked into doing photos:

when Carrie first started modeling. In her naivete, an agent convinced her to pose for this photo to submit to a lingerie company, claiming they could make her the next Victoria’s Secret model. She has since learned what a lie that was, and what a mistake it was to have the photo taken.

Wow, kinda dumb. Oh but she was 17.  In a handwritten statement to TMZ, Miss California said:

The photo in question was taken when I was a minor, several months before the 2005 pageant. The photo was not meant for disclosure to the general public.

So these were test shots, per your PR rep, taken in a professional context, and according to your PR rep  your agent said they were going to be submitted to a lingerie company.

But wait–if you were 17, you couldn’t sign a photo release because you were still a minor–and even at 17 semi nude shots are kind of a non-no–Somebody somewhere was breaking the law, unless you were a legally emancipated minor. Who signed the release? 

No release? Gee Carrie, are you getting ready to sue? Or did you, like some kid trying to get your bellybutton pierce at the mall, lie about your age–or even use fake ID? Let’s face it, after Traci Lords, most photographers are pretty leery of snapping fleshy pics without proof of the model’s age! And at 17 you couldn’t sign an agency contract. Who signed your contract with the agent? Did a parent sign for you?

And it gets weirder– it seems that somebody isn’t telling the whole story truth:

Prejean’s spokesperson told Access Hollywood that the photos were shot by a friend or family member to be used in a portfolio and that Carrie directed the photo session and someone else actually shot them.

To which set of alluring photos is the PR person refering? And uh, which story is it? Sleazy agent or family/friend? Where did the conflicting stories come from? Her PR person! And who is her PR rep? US News & World Report reports:

Prejean has hired one of the country’s premier Christian PR firms, A. Larry Ross Communications–which represents such evangelical powerhouses as Rick Warren, the Southern Baptist Convention, and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association–to be her "agency of record," according to Kristin Cole, the firm’s manager of account services.

Rick Warren’s PR response as of late has been to lie and then claim exhaustion, so expect some "dehydration" from Carrie pretty soon, since the disingenuous prevarications are flowing like sacramental wine on Easter.

Rule 34: If it exists, there is porn of it, so for goodness sakes, stop bitching about being picked on as part of a vast homo-loving conspiracy. Many celebs have had indiscreetly naked photos appear, like former Miss America Vanessa Williams and Madonna (both of whom got career boosts from the exposure), Cameron Diaz (who successfully sued), and Dr Laura (who cannot be unseen).

Meanwhile, there’s a good chance that Carrie could loose her crown. The contract she signed with Miss California USA prohibits

appearing in public or permitting myself to be photographed in a state of partial or total nudity or in a lewd, compromising or sexually suggestive manner constitutes a violation of this provision (this includes photographs of images that may appear on any Web site, such as MySpace or Facebook);

 and contains a clause asking participants to say whether they have conducted themselves

in accordance with the highest ethical and moral standards;

as well as asking if they have ever been photographed nude or partially nude

Equally as important–the contract prohibits Miss California from making personal appearances, giving interviews or making commercials without permission from pageant officials. Ooopsy!

Carrie has made unapproved televised appearances at her San Diego church and on behalf of the National Organization for Marriage, that "gathering storm group" which is hysterically and histrionically opposed to same-sex marriage. Carrie famously appears in a NOM commercial and that’s got the Miss Universe Organization (Miss California and Miss USA’s parent company) a bit peeved. Not because of the content of the commercial, but because copyrighted footage of the Miss USA pageant is being used without permission.

MUO sent a cease and desist letter to NOM, but the anti-gay group just sniffed and claimed Fair Use–the same argument they’re plying against Perez Hilton’s claim that NOM is using a 3 second clip from his blog calling Miss California a "dumb bitch"without his permission.  (I think he’s gonna loose that one.)

Perez also sent a DMCA take down claim with YouTube to have the NOM ad yanked off that site.

 Bottom line on Carrie’s apocalyptic panties: If she had won the crown, even without raising any controversy, odds are someone would have uncovered those underpanty pics. The issue is that she lied to the pageant and is violating the terms of her contract.  But like that other conservative pin-up gal, Gov GILF Sarah Palin,  Prejean is blaming other people for her indiscretions rathing than owning up. And in the meantime Carrie has become famous. Jesus was listening to your prayers, Carrie. It’s just that he has a sense of humor that matches his sense of justice!

Here’s an academic take on the nude photos: