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.
Whatever made you think I'd oppose a Christmas tree and manger in a public place? In fact I will be at one over in Berkeley Hills in about month's time.
The fact that a Bible in a drawer in a hotel seems to displease you. Both the Bible and Manger scenes are very religious and placed in a public area. If one offends you are upsets you the other should as well.
Fair point. Let me ask you; does a Manger scene or Christmas tree put up in a public display (even a governmental office) offend you?
Offended? No. Against it, that depends on the circumstances.
If a Christian display is allowed at a governmental office, then a display from any other religion should also be allowed right alongside it -- even from beliefs or non-beliefs that may cause offense. They should also allow non-religious displays to be presented. If not, then they shouldn't allow the Christian one either.
So, if the display is religiocentric and exclusive of any other display, then that should not be allowed. I'm all for equal representation in government and public buildings. This is why I do not believe things such as the ten commandments should be displayed in courthouses. It's impossible to include all beliefs and non-beliefs, and thus none of them should be singled out for exclusionary display.
Offended? No. Against it, that depends on the circumstances.
If a Christian display is allowed at a governmental office, then a display from any other religion should also be allowed right alongside it -- even from beliefs or non-beliefs that may cause offense. They should also allow non-religious displays to be presented. If not, then they shouldn't allow the Christian one either.
So, if the display is religiocentric and exclusive of any other display, then that should not be allowed. I'm all for equal representation in government and public buildings. This is why I do not believe things such as the ten commandments should be displayed in courthouses. It's impossible to include all beliefs and non-beliefs, and thus none of them should be singled out for exclusionary display.
Ok. Great. So I think we agree that a menorah should be included as well during December, right?
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?
Your well-documented feelings toward gays would likely prevent you from appreciating anything the gay community has to offer, but there was this contribution, for one.
Ok. Great. So I think we agree that a menorah should be included as well during December, right?
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.
Quote:
How would atheism be displayed?
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.
There is nothing about religions that SHOULD be included. But they are because of the tradition. We are a charitable people. Let them dance around their minora, baobab, or a pine tree (did pine trees actually figure in the Christmas myth? Who knows? Who cares
As an artist, I have every right to display Jesus on a cross facing a blowtorch or Buddha as a crazed Michelin man destroying mosques on Mars. As a right winger or religious zealot, you have every right to be offended or not. But who cares? I don't like many things and I can't seem to stop them. I can, however, do the most powerful thing I do every day: I can choose something else, a different thought, a different pose, whatever.
The right wingers here are so angry it clouds their judgment, but then, that is their normal state of mind. The black and white world they live in leaves little room for color, that feature that figures so prominently in the art world. What is it about them that makes them so upset about things that don't involve them? Don't like the picture, look away! Don't like what I do in my bedroom, stop peeping in the windows! I guess they have major issues prioritizing things because their focus just doesn't make any sense.
Last edited by mhouse2001; 12-01-2010 at 10:31 AM..
"smithsonian "homoerotic" art gallery is a liberals dream."
what you don't think that;
mark foley,
ted haggard
larry craig
bob allen
glenn murphy
roy ashburn,
richard curtis
jim west
jeff gannon
ed schrock
or
matthew glavin,
wouldn't enjoy the exhibit too?
+1
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.
