Blehh...

Free speech is protected but should not be dressed up and passed off as art; put it in a political statement museum if you think it actually has value. 

But really... Blehh....

Emmeran wrote:

Blehh...

Free speech is protected but should not be dressed up and passed off as art; put it in a political statement museum if you think it actually has value. 

But really... Blehh....

Then pass it off as gas.  I couldn't care less.  It's the mullahs I'm interested in.

Oh - and Choad, I think the same pinheads would have a problem with the Autoeroticism of Christ.

Last edited by Fled (2010-12-02 22:09:21)

Fled wrote:

Then pass it off as gas.  I couldn't care less.  It's the mullahs I'm interested in.

Oh - and Choad, I think the same pinheads would have a problem with the Autoeroticism of Christ.

Please.

Please, please, please.

Please do not poke the Xtian fundamentalists with sharp sticks.

They like to blow things up.

I do not want to be blown up.

Please.

opsec wrote:

I have an idea for an art installation, but I'll be going with termites.

The completely wooden ark, which would measure 500 ft. across, 75 ft. wide and 45 ft. high, is slated to be unveiled in spring 2014 as one of the attractions of the proposed $150 million Ark Encounter theme park.

Who learned them numbskull needledicks to read? The unit measure is a fucking cubit.

Let's take it out and see if it floats!

It's the Antsy Christ!

Washington Post wrote:

While it's true that Christianity has been front and center in some contemporary art, that's in part because it's the religion most Western artists know best. Cultural figures from the Muslim world, however, have not shied away from touching on their own traditions.

phreddy wrote:

Taint wrote:

Washington Post wrote:

While it's true that Christianity has been front and center in some contemporary art, that's in part because it's the religion most Western artists know best. Cultural figures from the Muslim world, however, have not shied away from touching on their own traditions.

Any artist living in a Muslim country who displayed Muhammad or Allah in a jar of urine wouldn't last 48 hours.

Art exists to express the ideas of the artist, period. It isn't (necessarily) uplifting or life affirming; it doesn't exist to lift the spirit of the viewer. As an individual human expression, it falls under the mantle of free speech. It's sort of ironic that those who howl the loudest about art also howl that money is free speech, isn't it? It's also ironic that people who rail against the repression of artists in Muslim countries want to go just as far in the Land Of The Free.

Tall Paul wrote:

Art exists to express the ideas of the artist, period. It isn't (necessarily) uplifting or life affirming; it doesn't exist to lift the spirit of the viewer. As an individual human expression, it falls under the mantle of free speech. It's sort of ironic that those who howl the loudest about art also howl that money is free speech, isn't it? It's also ironic that people who rail against the repression of artists in Muslim countries want to go just as far in the Land Of The Free.

Society itself determines what is art and what is drivel; the fool in the corner with video camera and crayons is just that.  Self proclaimed artists who are actually evangelists should fuckoff back to whatever miserable corner of society they crawled out of.

I'm not a Christian and I still found that particular thing to be highly offensive, a rational person is able to determine when something was created with the express intent of being so vile it offends as opposed to creations which question, ridicule or otherwise cast a new light upon an subject.

Free speech is a right; display in the Smithsonian is not.

Tall Paul wrote:

Then where does the right to NOT have someone else's work displayed in the Smithsonian come from?

The same place as the definition of what is and isn't art; the opinion of the greater society.

Free speech is a little abused in America; it was in the Wiemar Republic also - which why Germany no longer allows free speech.

and there lies the 'Gotcha'

Our other choice is the professional art community whos' judgement tends to follow the same path as haizing with everyone feeling obliged to push the envelope just a little bit further.  There must be a limit at some point, intentional defacing of a cultural object seems to be that limit with the vast majority of the population.

Courtesy of Taint:


Auto-edited on 2020-08-02 to update URLs

Donohue is a Catholic fundamentalist who supports things like the Vatican protection of boy-buggering priests, and feels that people speaking out against such things are just being anti-Catholic dicks.