Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So what does that mean? The decent taxpayers should be subjected to their devient, vulgar, crude vision of art with our tax dollars? Has the gay community nothing to offer but what would only be attractive to a twisted degenerate mind?
Actually the gay community offers more than most of your hardworking southern trashy types.
In every big city (Jackson, MS doesn't qualify), the gay community is among the wealthiest. They have the cleanest neighborhoods, best kept lawns, and nicest buildings. They pay exhorbanent amounts in taxes, yet receive few services in return (schools).
Go to Lakeview in Chicago, DuPont in DC, or Montrose in Houston. They are by far the most well kept areas in those cities. Get out of your 3,000 person town shell and see the world.
90% of the US is not Christian. 90% may have been born of people who are Christian by birth/religion, but there about 25% are atheists and 15% agnostics. To say the US is a Christian nation is pretty ignorant.
Just because people celebrate Christmas doesn't mean they are Christian. A lot of people who are atheist and agnostic celebrate it because it is no longer a religious holiday for many Americans, it is a time to get together with family and exchange gifts.
I didn't say that, so don't infer it. I said, if religious displays are to be allowed, then all of them should be equally represented. There are far more religions than just xianity and judaism. If there's a manger and a menorah, then all the other religions in the world should also be represented. Even if you only include the major religions of the world, that's about 300 different belief systems we're talking about, not including atheism or any of the non-religious philosophies.
I think the billboard in question is a good example for a predominantly xian nation. If it were a different country where the main religion was other than xian, then it could be different.
What's "xian"?
What if a private group donated 100% of the funding to put up a religious scene during a holiday that group holds dear at a government building (Christians-Christmas, Jews-Hanukkah, etc?)? Is this acceptable? I would guess it would be if all groups (religious or not) had access to doing so.
It seems people did not even bother to read the article, or study the exhibits in controversy. As typical, they're full of righteous, misplaced anger, relishing and wishing to advertise their supposed roles as protectors of American conservative values, while instead revealing themselves as reactionary, mis and under-educated individuals more interested in perpetuating their persecution complex.
The ONE thing that even remotely alludes to being "anti-Christian" is ONE scene in an art movie depicting a Jesus covered in ants. The scene is part of a larger movie exploring the lack of governmental or societal attention and concern for the AIDS crisis when it first began in the 1980s. The artist was depicting the resistance to acknowleding the AIDS epidemic that was largely based on religious dogma and motives. He was criticizing the church, and has every right to do so. Just like Martin Luther condemned the church in his own way (and was also critcized for it by the conservatives of his day), so too can any artist. This isn't the Middle East.
Of course the Christian Science Monitor, hand wringing politicians and Fox News would choose that one scene out of an entire move, and (OH MY GOSH!) NAKED PEOPLE PICTURES to focus on. As if naked people and images aren't all over the museum already! From Greek pottery, to naked baby cherubs in religious frescoes.
Maybe the Xtians on this board can organize an "art burning" bonfire, or a "fig leaf placing" campaign like the Popes did in the middle ages.
Religion should not and is not free from being criticized. Don't like it? Too bad, so sad. You do not have the right to never be offended. Religion should be criticized! So should any exclusionary dogma. So should anything that subjugates people, discriminates against freedom of speech, teaches bigotry and hatred, or oppresses any person simply because they were born a certain way.
If your religion can't survive that, it is fatally flawed and it doesn't deserve to exist.
I do not have the right to NEVER be offended? Well yall do not either and if I can be offended than YALL can be offended. Which means The Ten Commandments being put back up in courthouses where they were, Christian Crosses and Confederate flags being ALLOWED in schools again, and the American flag being present in classrooms, where it belongs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you have another link?
