The Misadventures of the Romantic Cannibals

October 7, 2010 at 8:54 AM 14 comments

Recently, an “artist” had his painting of Jesus engaging in a sex act destroyed by a woman who visited the art museum with a crowbar.  She approached the display, broke the glass over the print and then tore the print itself.

You have to wonder what makes people think and I’m not talking about the woman who destroyed the artwork.  I’m talking about the idiot who created the artwork to begin with.  I’m sorry if that sounds rude, but considering the fact that he created a completely offensive piece of art that should never have been created much less showcased, he deserves to be called an idiot.

The “artist” – Stanford University professor Enrique Chagoya – was saddened that his work had been attacked.  He stated, “My intention has never been to offend anybody.”  Really?  What did he think was going to happen?

Let’s change a few things here.  What does Mr. Chagoya believe would have occurred had the subject of his print been Muhammad?  Moreover, are we to believe that the folks who made the decision to show the artwork at the museum would have actually decided to place the work up had the subject been Islam’s prophet?  Do I really need to answer that?

People – for some asinine reason – would have not wanted to offend our “friendly Muslims.”  They would have wanted to be sensitive to their feelings and not create a situation in which Muslims would react violently to a work of “art” that would obviously cause them distress.

No such courtesy is extended to Christians, however.  For Christians, the world can do whatever it likes to Jesus, the Founder of OUR religion.  What are Christians going to do?  They will certainly not act like pagans (or Muslim extremists), will they?

Sometimes, it is difficult to continue to take what this world dishes out without responding to it with vitriol and anger.  I am certainly not encouraging anyone who claims to be a Christian to do violence.  I am also not encouraging those within Christendom to take the law into their own hands.

Sometimes, it becomes a bit much with the way the world pumps out sleaze and garbage directly from the cesspool of their minds.  In this case, we have someone who teaches at Stanford University (you would think professors there would have a modicum of intelligence), manages to come up with a piece of garbage portraying Jesus in a sex act – something He never would have done, period – and then this same professor has the temerity to say that he never meant to offend anyone!  Was he hoping for a pat on the back from authentic Christians?  Come on, give me a break, please.

Had this “artwork” been a depiction of Muhammad, it would likely have been actually based on the “prophet’s” own life, since he is said to have had many concubines and his youngest wife was six-year old, Aisha!  Of course, to give him credit, he DID wait three years until she was nine before consummating the marriage (he says sardonically).

The problem of course is that even IF the print in question had depicted Muhammad, though likely true to real life, it still would have caused severe consternation within the Islamic world.  Professor Chagoya would have had to worry about his neck because of the calls to behead him and instead of brashly placing his “artwork” on display publicly, those in the decision-making office would have quietly deferred to the Islamic world and not displayed this objectionable junk.

If I had the money, I would post it for the woman who directed her passion for the Lord Jesus (albeit by breaking the law), so she could be out on bail.  Maybe that would simply be supporting her unlawful act, yet it is getting to the point where even though God has stated, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay,” you want to do something to come to His defense as you would with anyone you dearly loved.

This idea of portraying Jesus as a man who would even think of having some type of sexual intercourse outside of marriage is ludicrous, yet even in this, Christians will be looked upon as the instigators.  We will be seen as the intolerant ones, all the while, Islam marches along with its knee-jerk reaction to anything that smacks of an attack on Allah or Muhammad.  The world applauds (or at least remains silent) their efforts to protect and defend their founder and their god.

When Christians do this same thing, we are seen as intolerant, hate-mongers.  The people who hate are the people who deliberately place Jesus in positions that He would never have been in.  This does not seem to matter though, does it?

I remember when I was in 7th grade.  We had a snack shop where we could buy sodas, candy, popcorn and other things during our break.  Sometimes, when I had the extra money, I would buy a small bag of popcorn to tide me over until lunch.

Out of the blue one day, a kid came up, grabbed a handful of popcorn, and with a smile on his face, kept walking.  It happened so fast that I had no time to respond.  I figured if he did it again, I would be ready.

I did not have to wait long.  The very next day, as I was enjoying my popcorn, the same kid came up and attempted to steal some of my popcorn.  As his hand approached the popcorn bag, I simply said, “Knock it off!” and he walked away slightly embarrassed.  Good.  I had taken care of that problem and I thought it was over, but the kid had the last laugh.

In the very next class just after break, there we were.  I ignored him and he seemed to be ignoring me.  As the class settled in, the kid started to complain to those around him that I would not let him have any of my popcorn.  First of all, he never asked.  He simply took what was not his to take.

That was not bad enough though.  What was worse was that the kid was African American.  All of a sudden, some of the kids were saying, “Fred’s a racist.”  The teacher who was at the front of the class did nothing.  The kid in front of me (who I thought was a friend) turned to me to glare.  I tried to explain myself and all he said was, “Shut up!”

Funny how in spite of the fact that I was right, I became wrong because of the false accusations.  I glanced over at the African American kid and he looked like the Cheshire Cat, grinning from ear to ear.  That was frustrating, but what can you do when people have made their minds up about something?

It’s the same thing with this “artwork.”  The guy who created the piece was wrong to create it.  The museum was wrong to display it and even though the woman who destroyed it with a crowbar broke laws to do so, she was more right than either the artist or the people at the museum.

However, please take a moment to look at this same situation if it had been Muhammad, and please do not tell me that there is NO double standard in this country.

Hating, belittling, castigating, and bashing Christians is the only real hate-crime left in America that is permissible.

Entry filed under: 9/11, alienology, Atheism and religion, Demonic, dispensationalism, Eastern Mysticism, emergent church, Islam, israel, Judaism, Life in America, new age movement, Posttribulational Rapture, Pretribulational Rapture, Religious - Christian - End Times, Religious - Christian - Prophecy, Religious - Christian - Theology, salvation, Satanism, Sharia Law, temple mount, ufology. Tags: , , , .

Study-Grow-Know on the Radio Pornography, Obscenity, Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression

14 Comments

  • 1. Jedwabne  |  October 18, 2010 at 11:50 AM

    So, let’s say I believe in Jesus and the Bible, and I get the perfect sacrifice, I do whatever i have to do to go to heaven when I die — do I have to go to the same place as you? Like, can I just accept Jesus, or are you a part of the package deal? I like Jesus, just not sure I could stomach spending eternity with you…

    • 2. modres  |  October 18, 2010 at 3:11 PM

      Doug, you have not even met me (Doug: “I would not ever WANT to meet you!”), yet you have decided that – as judge of my life – I am a worthless human being and you are far better than I am. Apparently, you see no arrogance in your words at all, yet you have the time and temerity to accuse me of “hating.” Wow. You see nothing duplicitous in your verbiage?

      As for the rest of what you said, I have no idea what you mean.

      What do you mean you “get the perfect sacrifice?”

      What do you mean “I do whatever I have to do to go to heaven when I die”?

      You didn’t really read what I wrote before did you (with understanding)? I would like to suggest that you read the gospel accounts of the life of Jesus if that is what interests you. You would find that He is not this long-haired, hippy freak who went around cheering everyone up.

      What is interesting, Doug, is that when the woman was just about to be stoned by the religious zealots, Jesus DID defend her. He also CHIDED her for her sinful lifestyle. On another occasion when He met a woman at the well who turned out to be Samaritan, He not only told her HOW to be saved, but explained to her what she had done wrong (was on her fifth husband, had slept around, etc.).

      In truth Doug, you are FAR more judgmental than I am.

      If you “accept” Jesus (how wonderful of you to even consider “accepting” the King of the universe), your world view will change. If you do not “accept” Jesus, your worldview will continue on its self-centered pathway. Either way, in the end, “every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.” (Philippians 2:10).

      As I suspected, you originally came to this blog of mine to simply vent. Your judgmental attitude is on display from that first post and remains with this one. You could care less about any answers. In fact, it is clear that you view yourself with such high esteem that any answer I might provide to you is promptly ignored anyway, since you have decided I am so far beneath you.

      The only reason you are responding at all is to showcase what you believe to be your “wisdom.” Doug, if this is your wisdom, it is really nothing, I’m sorry to say. I’m not trying to offend you (though I have, I’m sure), but in truth, I’ve heard young children provide far better understanding than you.

      Are we done yet? Surely, you have something you can go photograph while offering praise to Darwin and the “circle of life,” don’t you? I’m amazed that you want to waste your time like this, frankly.

  • 3. Jedwabne  |  October 17, 2010 at 6:50 PM

    So, what exactly are you saying is the solution to all of this?

    From hearing other christians on this subject, I would think that as a “christian” your message would at least include some concept of love, which is curiously absent – but then maybe not all christians are the same.

    I know, I know ” hate the sin, love the sinner”, right? I’m wondering why there are no examples of Jesus protesting against sinners in the Bible (to my insufficient knowledge)? I see him in the temple, ranting against what religious people had turned his father’s house into, but I never see him attacking non-Jews, prostitutes, gays, etc. with crowbars.

    The artist discussed has said repeatedly that the image in the painting is not Christ, but a representation of what he sees as a corruption of spirituality by the church, specifically, the sexual abuse of priests on young children. In spite of his vulgar depiction, does he not make a good point? They’ve taken something “precious” (his word) and made it a mockery. It seems like you actually agree with artist!

    One other thing, do you get some kind of power-surge from calling people idiots?? Wow! But I guess rude is acceptable when “defending the truth”, huh? I’m sure you have a bible verse to justify that, too.

    Interesting read….. not a belief system I would ever align myself with. I could never be a part of a victim mentality that bashes others in defense of being bashed – I don’t think I could ever generate this much hate to be a good “chistian” as you display here. Hope it works for you, though!

    • 4. modres  |  October 17, 2010 at 10:33 PM

      Well, the solution I offer is something that you would consider extremely narrow.

      From hearing other christians on this subject, I would think that as a “christian” your message would at least include some concept of love, which is curiously absent – but then maybe not all christians are the same.

      What is love to you? From reading your blurb, it seems like you simply want to vent, and that you’re not really interested in any type of response I might give.

      Jesus protested against sinners quite a bit really. Yes, we see Him MOSTLY ranting against religious leaders. Why? Because of their SIN. He, like John the Baptist called them all types of things – brood of vipers, whitewashed sepulchers, and much more. He often referred to His disciples as “foolish,” or “faithless,” and got annoyed with them on numerous occasions. But why do you point only to Jesus? Paul – under inspiration of the Holy Spirit – wrote at least 12 epistles found in the New Testament. Have you read them? Romans starts out at a gallop critical of people who exchanged the truth for the lie and lowered themselves to the lowest common denominator which is homosexuality (cf. Romans 1-2).

      Read through some of Paul’s writings, or Peter’s, or James, or John, or Jude and tell me what you read. This idea of “love” as the world views it seems to have little in common with the love expressed by God throughout His Word. According to the world, Christians are supposed to turn the other cheek and essentially be peaceable, loving (sentimentalism), doormats. This is a complete misrepresentation of the Sermon on the Mount, but this is the world’s view.

      I have run into attitudes like yours many times. It goes like this. If I say “Homosexuality is wrong,” I am accused of being a hatemongering individual, in spite of the fact that I have not raised my voice, that I have in no way shown hatred toward a person who is gay. I have made a statement about an ACT and ATTITUDE that I believe the Bible condemns. Yet, because I have the temerity to say it, people accuse me of HATING.

      If I say in the same tone and demeanor that “Prostitution is wrong,” no one accuses me of hating prostitutes or “johns.” The double standard is palpable. Why? Because it is politically INCORRECT to condemn in any way, shape, or form, the action of homosexuality. Prostitution does not come under such protection. If I say “Murder is wrong,” or “Stealing is wrong,” or “Lying is wrong,” few would disagree with me and as yet, I have not come across anyone who accuses me of hating murderers, thieves, or liars. It is only when I say that “Homosexuality is wrong,” do people get up in arms.

      If I say “Abortion is wrong,” I am accused of wanting to remove the rights of women to decide for themselves what they want to do with their “bodies.” The problem of course, is that the decision regarding their body should have been made PRIOR to becoming pregnant. Are you aware that most abortions are performed on women who have been pregnant before and chose abortion as the means of termination? They took no precautions and neither did their partner – repeatedly. A woman’s right to decide about her body is fine, but unfortunately, when she carries another life within her, that life should also be considered.

      The landscape is politically charged today with all sorts of ways to trip up Christians. Someone is either a Christian or they are not. There might be immature Christians, or mature Christians, but there is NO Christian who becomes perfect by becoming a Christian. Christianity is NOT a belief system. Christianity begins with a spiritual transaction (cf. John 3) and there are TOO many people today who PROFESS to be Christians who are not, simply because they have never had a spiritual transaction.

      What you call “hatred” is a judgment that you have erroneously made based on my use of the word “idiot.” So on one hand you are accusing me of being a “hater” yet I could say the same about you. You would say that you are not a Christian and so that doesn’t apply. In fact, your words boast of the fact that you are far better than me, so if you are far better than I am, you would think that your response to my blog would be far more intelligent, and far less angry and judgmental, yet it is not.

      By the way, I have NOT read where the artist has said (even once, much less repeatedly) that the individual in the print in question is NOT Jesus. I have read where he has stated that he never intended to offend anyone. Yet, in spite of his disclaimer, he has an obvious image of Jesus Christ in one print and yet when we arrive at the print in question, we are to believe that the image with a man’s face, beard, and long hair (that is often seen as Jesus in a religious – Roman Catholic setting) is all of a sudden not Jesus? The idea that it would have been extremely easy for the artist to create something in which the image of a priest was actually pictured, instead of Jesus (or “a representation of what he sees as a corruption of spirituality by the church, specifically, the sexual abuse of priests on young children”), yet he chose to use an image that would invoke thoughts of Jesus is difficult to believe.

      You asked in the beginning of your rant what the solution is? There is no solution as long as people continue to exchange the truth of God for the lie. This however, does NOT mean that I cannot protest it in a way that stays within the confines of the legal parameters of the US Constitution. Does the artist have to change his ways? No. Does the museum have to take down the print? No. I don’t expect that they will.

      In the book of Ezekiel, God told the prophet Ezekiel that He (God) was sending him (Ezekiel) to preach to the people of Israel. They were corrupt and pretended to be religious, yet God knew they were idolaters because He of course, saw what they did in secret. The message that God consistently said to Ezekiel throughout the book was that Ezekiel was to tell the people of Israel “whether they listen or not.” Had Ezekiel NOT told the people what God wanted him to say, Ezekiel would have been held accountable. God warned Ezekiel that they would not listen to him, yet he was to still do the job God raised him up to do.

      You would have accused Ezekiel of hating the people of Israel because his message was harsh. In fact, because Jesus, John the Baptist, Paul and others used harsh language at times, you would have to accuse them of hating. Are you not aware of the times Jesus went into the Temple, made a whip from a cord, overturned the money changer’s tables, and with the whip He made, chased them all out of the Temple? These were average citizens trying to make money. They were not religious leaders, but every day people.

      Jesus drove them out of the Temple area telling them He would not allow them to turn His “Father’s house into a den of thieves,” (cf. John 2:3-17, etc.). As long as the world sees Jesus as some peace-loving, hippy who simply wanted people to “get along,” they will never see the real Jesus. He was far more than someone who minded His own business, never got politically involved, and never had a bad word to say about anyone.

      It might be wise for you to take the time to at least read Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John before you take the time to condemn me for doing something that you believe is “unloving” and “unChristian.” The gospels are replete with examples of how Jesus often took people to task, chided them for their lack of faith, and more. At the risk of you taking the following words as “hate-filled,” you would sound far more convincing if you actually knew what you were talking about regarding Jesus and Christianity in general. There are too many definitions of what it means to be a Christian today. There is only ONE authentic definition of it and it is found in Scripture.

      By the way, all the photographs on your Web site showcase much of God’s creation, yet it is doubtful that you see it as His creation. You see a world that has evolved over eons. The Bible tells us in Colossians and elsewhere that Jesus Christ created all things…for His glory, not for yours, mine, or Darwin’s. It is for His glory that all things…including you and me were created. Yet for the average person today, their faith is in a system that is seen by most to be fully scientific, yet there is no real science that supports it.

      Doug, you need to address something in your own life and it has to do with salvation. I’m assuming from your comments that you do not have salvation. I’m assuming that you know little about true Christianity. I’m assuming that you are not even aware of what authentic Christianity is because you refer to is as a belief system, which is not. At its heart, Christianity is entering into an eternal relationship with Jesus Christ. This begins (as Jesus points out in John 3) as a spiritual transaction (something He calls being “born again”). Without it, no one receives salvation, not you, not me, no one.

      The reason you do not understand Christianity is because you are too filled with the world’s system and view. It shoves Christianity out, as it has no room for a personal God at all. You judge me by what I say and instead of shining the same light on your own life, you find contentment in believing that since you have uncovered another “unloving, callous, duplicitous, hating, hypocritical” Christian, then you are safe. You’re not safe at all, because you SHOULD be comparing yourself with Jesus Christ, not me, or any other of His followers.

      In fact Doug, when you die, your life will be compared with His. His life on earth was perfect. No sin was ever found in Him, which is why He became the perfect, willing sacrifice for your sin and mine. The difference between us at this point is that I trust Christ for my salvation. You trust yourself…IF you actually need it.

      You believe that because you see me as hypocritical, when you stand before God (if God actually exists, you intone), then you will point out to God all the people who have claimed to be Christians. You will try to argue that these so-called Christians were hypocrites and because they were hypocrites, how could God expect you to “buy into” Christianity, since they were the only example of it?

      God will of course, point out that you had access to the Bible, and the example of God the Son – Jesus Christ. You chose NOT to compare yourself to Him and because of that, never realized that He was never hypocritical.

      Of course, all of this is simply a mental exercise, because when you die, and if you die without ever receiving salvation, then unfortunately, you will have no confidence to say anything to God. You will know – all too well – why He cannot have you in His presence. It will be because you never trusted in the only One Person – Jesus – who died to take away your sin.

      The difference between you and me is minimal. We are both sinners. We are both imperfect. I have acknowledged it before God and asked Him to save me according to the richness of His love and based on the propitiation of Christ on Calvary’s cross. You have not done so. In essence then, my faith is in the perfect sacrifice of Jesus. Your faith is in yourself. Nothing else matters, Doug.

  • 5. Uzza  |  October 12, 2010 at 8:08 PM

    Thank you for the compliment re intelligent discourse. To answer your question, the problem with christianity that doesn’t exist with islam is that, while islam is mostly on the other side of the world I have to interact with fundamentalist christians every day.

    I’m a little puzzled why you pointed me to Amin al-Husseini.

    • 6. modres  |  October 12, 2010 at 9:40 PM

      But see Uzza, that makes little sense. While radical Islam may YET be on the other side of the world, it is rapidly gaining ground throughout the globe. Check out The Netherlands, Great Britain and parts of France to see how militant Islam has all but taken over.

      You may feel safe that Islam is “over there,” but you can’t believe that it will remain so forever.

      But in comparing Christian fundamentalists with radical Muslims, when was the last time you saw a Christian behead or kill in some other way someone who did not convert to Christianity?

      When was the last time you saw a bunch of fundamentalist Christians bury someone up to their waist in the dirt, and stone them to death? When did you last see a group of fundamentalist Christians gather in an empty soccer stadium to execute women and men who were not “radical” Islam enough?

      Your response also indicates that you – unfortunately – have little to no empathy for those who DO live on the other side of the world and have to deal with the type of physically punitive, legalistic form of Islam that did NOT exist in modern times until al-Husseini.

      The reason – by the way – that I directed you to al-Husseini, was simply because at first glance, you seem over-the-top in favor of Islam, is spite of their record of actual human rights abuses.

      Your reason then for seeming to have more tolerance for Islam is only due to geographical location. That’s a fairly selfish reason, don’t you think? You don’t honestly believe that even hardcore Christian fundamentalism equates to the abuses consistently found within Islam, do you?

      Could you list for me please the numerous Christian abolitionists that lived through the ages and then would you mind taking the time to list Islamic abolitionists?

      I appreciate your taking the time to answer my question. I was actually hoping for something with a bit more depth, but thanks for your time.

  • 7. Uzza  |  October 11, 2010 at 10:28 PM

    Wow. One question, please.
    How do you know that’s Jesus in the last panel?

    • 8. modres  |  October 12, 2010 at 7:55 AM

      Could you show me WHERE the artist has DENIED that it is of Jesus Christ since all the publicity BEGAN? While I have not seen where he has denied his other print being of Muhammad, the publicity has NOT dealt with that particular print. Beyond that, it is CLEAR from your own blogging and from the prints themselves that people understand the Jesus figure to be Jesus. In fact, at least one of the prints of Jesus uses one very famous face/head of Jesus. There are also numerous instances of Catholic imagery.

      So, back to MY question – could you please explain how you KNOW beyond doubt that the print you allege to be of Muhammad, is actually of Muhammad? There is nothing that I can see that distinguishes the identity of the alleged Muhammad print to be Muhammad. The individual in question could easily be a Jewish individual, which goes more along with the idea that Jews are to avoid pork (thereby slamming orthodox Judaism), but Muslims do not have to do so. Out of ALL the prints, there is only one that MIGHT refer to Muhammad and so far, I have heard no indication from the artist that it is, but of course, I may have missed something.

      And wouldn’t your time be better spent turning radical Muslims onto the knowledge that their prophet (as you allege) is the subject of blasphemous art?

      By the way, I could not help but notice how biased your views are in favor of Islam. Your Venn diagram of the three overlapping circles is interesting. According to you, being Islamic is fine. In fact, being in the fanatic area of Islam is fine (again, according to you – the area of the two circles which cross over INTO fanaticism, but are not fully into the fanaticism area), however, it appears as though it is NOT okay with you apparently to even BE in the Christian circle at all.

      The Venn Diagram is labeled “What’s the Problem?” You then have a line pointing to the red circle labeled “Fanaticism” with the words “THAT is the problem.” The words “NOT that” pointing to the overlapping area where the Fanaticism circle overlaps the Islam circle. Then the words “and certainly, not that” pointing to the green Islam circle.

      It is clear that where there are NO words, the implication is THAT is the problem, which for you, includes the light blue Christianity circle AND the overlapping circle into the green Fanaticism.

      I’m not quite sure how you distinguish between Muslims who are moderate and those who are radical, and those who are somewhat in-between, but the reality is that you would be hard-pressed to find Muslims in the overlapping group to begin with. There are essentially TWO main groups of Muslims.

      Maybe I’m missing something, but if you could point out to me those you believe to be in the overlapping area, I’d appreciate it. Please don’t point to people like Imam Rauf or his wife Daisy, or Minister Farrakhan. These people are radicals in moderate clothing.

      If I were to ask you to respond with one succinct sentence regarding your obvious problem with Christianity that does not exist with Islam, what would that be? I notice from your own blog you are actually capable of intelligent discourse and that’s what I’m looking for here, Uzza. If you are unable to do that, then just ignore the question.

  • 9. Uzza  |  October 11, 2010 at 8:00 PM

    Hate to break it to you, but the panel two over from the left is a picture of Mohammed with pigs as prostitutes. There hasn’t been a word from any muslims either.

    • 10. modres  |  October 11, 2010 at 8:41 PM

      Yes, I’ve heard that (though I find it difficult that you really “hate[d] to break it to me”).

      My specific comments though were related to the print of Jesus Christ and His being on the receiving end of a sexual act. My point connected with that was that had MUHAMMAD been pictured in the same manner as Jesus is portrayed and had it been clear that it was, in fact, Muhammad, I cannot imagine radical Muslims remaining quiet, given how they react strongly and physically to anything they deem as offensive to Allah or their prophet.

      It’s also possible that they are not even AWARE of the print that allegedly shows Muhammad with two pigs. Tell me truthfully that you have NEVER heard of any incident in which radical Muslims have vociferously protested that it is expressly against Islamic (Sharia) Law to portray Muhammad in any form? Maybe you should start directing radical Muslims to the museum and see what happens…

      The reality is simple. The Islamic world got up in arms when it was noted that a pastor in Florida was going to burn the Qur’an. Do you honestly believe these same radical Muslims – if they knew about the print allegedly of Muhammad – would sit still and say nothing? Come on, you can’t be that naive. You are assuming that they know and have chosen to ignore it. You are also attempting to imply that somehow, this woman who claims to be a Christian is far worse than any Muslim (radical or no) because of her action, which you deem unconscionable, yet because Muslims have done nothing regarding the sacrilege of their prophet, then they are far more personable and law-abiding. This of course is also based on your belief that the radical Muslim world knows of the print in question and has chosen to “let it go.”

      They have never ignored things like this before, killing a Dutch filmmaker on the street, beheading people at will, Australian Muslim clerics calling for the beheading of Geert Wilders of The Netherlands because he is opposing Islam and many others things as well.

      I think it’s doubtful the Loveland Museum knew for certain that one of the prints in question allegedly portrays Muhammad. But let me ask you, if the museum became surrounded by protesting radical Muslims who threatened to destroy the museum, do you think the museum would continue to keep that print of Muhammad up?

      You severely underestimate radical Muslims who have said that Christians are “weak” because we do not go out and kill people because they take the name of Jesus in vain, using it as an epithet.

      The ignorance of people in this country (or even in various parts of the world where Islam has not been a threat) never ceases to amaze me…

      By the way, what – if anything – provides the unqualified identity of Muhammad in that print? In other words, how do people KNOW it is Muhammad and not some Bedouin? Is the print labeled? Is there something that identifies the contents as being connected to Muhammad?

      By the way, since tax dollars have gone and continue to support the museum itself, it makes little difference if this particular art show was made possible by private donations or public funds. In either case, if not for taxpayer funding, the museum would not exist in the first place. Based on that alone, people have every right to complain if they do not like or appreciate what those at the museum opt to showcase. According to the museum’s own website, the city of Loveland took over operations of the museum in 1946. While I realize they have their sponsors and community contributors, they still receive tax dollars from the people of Loveland. It also appears clear enough that the Visual Arts Commission of the City of Loveland oversees aspects of art and art-related programs in Loveland.

      If any form of government (including government committees) is involved in the museum, then tax dollars are at work.

      Oh, hey Uzza, I checked your page out. Rather than comment myself, I’ll simply quote someone who left a comment on your page (someone who is no friend of Christianity apparently):

      The tenor of Uzza’s blog since he’s resumed writing has been one of flat-out condemnation of Christianity and it is he who is painting all Christians as bullies. Unlike his posts from the time when he blogged the Qur’an, he parses only the negative, idiotic, and impossible passages from the bible and simply ignores anything positive.”

      That’s interesting. Christians are bullies. I see, yet radical Muslims sacrificed 3,000 to Allah on 9/11. They have killed untold thousands upon thousands for no other reason than their victims refuse to convert to Islam. Constantine did some terrible things as well. That simply proves that you have a problem with certain groups or individuals who call themselves Christians, but prefer and have no problem giving a pass to nearly all Muslims as downtrodden and misunderstood.

      My suggestion is that you become extremely familiar with Islamic (Sharia) Law because whether you believe radical Muslims are few and far between or not, the reality seems to be that they have all but taken over The Netherlands, they are close to accomplishing that in Great Britain, and parts of France and have their eye on the United States. In other words, they have no intention of stopping until the entire world becomes Islamic.

      I’d also like to suggest that you do some research on a man named Haj Amin al-Husseini. But who knows…you may find al-Husseini to be to your liking…

  • 11. Sal is right  |  October 11, 2010 at 12:48 PM

    Sorry, Sal is right. He’s a bit over the top in how he said “some things” but for the most part, he’s right.

    • 12. modres  |  October 11, 2010 at 1:26 PM

      Absolutely not. While it is perfectly permissible to say that you BELIEVE Sal to be correct, or in YOUR OPINION, Sal is correct, it is absolutely INCORRECT of you to say that Sal is unequivocally correct. There are any number of court rulings and statutes that disagree with Sal, and by connection, yourself.

      The display of “artwork” at the Loveland Museum may not necessarily be PORNOGRAPHIC, but there is legal precedent for accurately describing it as being fully OBSCENE and obscenity is NOT protected under the first amendment of freedom of expression or freedom of speech, no more than yelling “FIRE!” in a crowded theater when no fire actually exists is protected under the same amendment.

      “A bit over the top”? It is difficult to see any sense of real intelligence in Sal’s comments, proven by what he says and how he says it. He likes to think of himself as intelligent to a fault, when in point of fact, he appears to be nothing more than a blowhard whose anger motivates him, not any intelligence that he may or may not have. IF he has any noticeable level of intelligence, it is severely undercut by the way in which he chooses to express himself. A truly intelligent person would have little difficulty in getting his point across without having to resort to ad hominem attacks, epithets, and contradictions.

      If you believe that Sal is correct, that’s certainly your right. But to state without equivocation that he IS correct (for the most part), simply shows your own bias and lack of research into this subject as well.

  • 13. Sal Boca  |  October 7, 2010 at 7:19 PM

    The nature of art is similar to the nature of religion, in that it isn’t your place to decide for anyone else. Regardless of his intent to offend, it isn’t your business to decide what art should or should not be made or displayed. It isn’t my business to decide what religion you are allowed to be, it isn’t your business to decide what art he is allowed to make, or the gallery is allowed to exhibit.

    EDITOR: It’s obviously SOMEONE’S job to decide IF, WHEN, and WHERE artwork is displayed, isn’t it? Art does not simply appear on walls. People who decide what to put up in their museums, for how long they should keep said art up and why they should place it up, do so because that is their job. My job is to determine whether or not I agree with them. If I do not agree with them, of COURSE I can state that and whether you or anyone else LIKES it is totally beside the point. You have no right to tell me that I am unable to exercise my freedom of expression or freedom of speech in this regard than I can FORCE the museum to take their offensive artwork down. You’re an idiot, aren’t you? Come on…be honest. 🙂

    Of course, spoken like a true idealist and liberal fascist. The problem of course, is that you have decided that I cannot decide what my own opinion should be, nor should I voice that opinion because it OFFENDS you

    Additionally, very few people in America support extreme Muslim reactions to images of Muhammed, most people in this country believe in both the freedom to worship as one sees fit and the right to create images as one sees fit. I would be interested to see ONE example of anyone in this country, who isn’t an extreme Islamist himself, supporting the death threats and other over-reactions that have come with images of Muhammed.

    No, you wouldn’t. And it would be interesting to know where you dug up the facts as you proclaim them.

    I doubt you can come up with ONE example.

    And I doubt you would believe me if I did.

    Christians in this country have more political weight and cultural pull than any other single group. Your silly example of one Black child using centuries of racial inequality against you ONCE, without mentioning the lifetime of advantages you’ve had from being White in America, is shallow, ignorant, debasing and incredibly self-absorbed, in addition to being irrelevant to the topic at hand.

    This man created a piece of art that you don’t like, okay, don’t look at it. This woman took things into her own hands and decided to destroy something that doesn’t belong to her. If someone came and destroyed the art in your church because they don’t believe the same thing you do, how would you feel about it?
    It’s called the social contract d*******. Maybe if you read a f***ing newspaper on occasion you’d realize we phased out rule by religious zealot a few generations ago.

    And yet, you say that Christians in this country have more political weight and cultural pull than any other single group. Which is it? If I were grading your paper, I would give you a “D” because you are not only repetitious, but you have contradicted yourself at least three times. Dude, grow a brain and try to figure out what it is you want to say before you simply allow your fingers to wander over the keyboard. If I had the patience required to deal with someone as self-aggrandizing as yourself, I would ask you to rewrite this, correct all misspelled words, figure out your thesis, and then stick with it.

    (This last comment has been omitted due to the absolute and abject ignorance and puerility of the poster.)

    • 14. modres  |  October 7, 2010 at 9:50 PM

      Oh and by the way, Sal, if you had a modicum of intelligence, I might be tempted to allow you to post in the future, but your use of epithets and stupidity gives you away.

      Your sweeping generalizations and insipid arguments make no sense.

      I am denying you your freedom of speech on my board for future reference. If you don’t like my board or my comments, don’t read them. Just turn away. For goodness sakes, you take me to task for something that you yourself are unwilling to do. My comments obviously bothered you, but instead of turning away from them, you decided you had to comment on them in order to try to insult me into silence. You are not even intelligent enough to realize that YOU are doing what you accuse ME of doing. Look in the mirror and stop assuming what you do not know or understand.

      Deal with it and don’t bother me again with your asinine comments. Your time would be better spent by sticking hot pokers in your eyes. At least then you would have the satisfaction of knowing that you have actually accomplished something as opposed to trying to best me with intelligence that you simply do not have.

      Thank you,
      Dr. Rev. Fred DeRuvo


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 13,188 other followers

Our Books on Amazon

Study-Grow-Know Archives

Blog Stats

  • 966,661 hits

%d bloggers like this: