• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Controversial 'Piss Christ' art back in NY

ChrisL said:
I wasn't aware that someone made it sound like a compliment. It's certainly not a compliment. It is an ignorant thing to do though, but I try to not let ignoramuses bother me . . . too much anyway. ;)
Click to expand...

The argument is that it is a compliment, based on the artist's explanation. A compliment that illustrates how Christians are the problem, not Jesus. hahaha



Hatuey said:
Another person who doesn't understand the image at all. I wish you'd spend less time being offended and more time actually understanding it.
Click to expand...

Hatuey said:
You're offended for the wrong reasons. The image isn't attacking Christ. It's attacking the way in which people have destroyed his message. So it's not attacking him, it's attacking you and your ilk.
Click to expand...

But he's not supposed to be offended.
 
Last edited:
winston53660 said:
Piss Christ was over 20 years ago. Some of the shock might have worn off.
Click to expand...

Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses was in 1988, Muslims just raised the bounty on his head a couple of weeks ago. You'd think some of this would wear off, but apparently not.
 
Connery said:
One has nothing to do with the other.
Click to expand...

Oh absolutely one does have everything to do with the other on several different levels...

1. The disgusting photo is very insulting to devout Christians in this country as well as others, just as this simple, low budget youtube video is insulting to Muslims.

2. We have free speech in this country to do this, that is what the SCOTUS upheld, however, the Obama administration felt it necessary to publicly march the maker of the video out under Sheriff parade for the camera's they said for questioning, and then asked youtube if they would reconsider pulling the video (a clear attempt to censor) to which youtube said no, good for them. Are they asking Seranno to not display his trash?

3. Obama's administration has made a point of shaping his policy in the ME based on appeasement, and deference to their sensibilities, where as here in the US he has made it a point to dismiss Christians, bully Christians, and now he has the chance to show that he is even handed in his condemnation of insulting productions by Americans, and will he? no, and you will dismiss that unequal treatment in any way you can.

Congress made a law regarding a the National Endowment on the Arts the US Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutional.
Click to expand...

So why put out an apology commercial to Pakistan then?

That ruling was in 1998. Why on earth would Obama or any president comment on this in his official capacity?
Click to expand...

You are conflating into an argument that which has not been argued by me. That is a strawman argument sir.

Sharia law is not the law of the land in the US so the answer is no.
Click to expand...

Ah, but that is just it, there are those that see nothing wrong with Sharia being instituted in the US, including those sitting on the SC bench that tend to look outside the constitution to arrive at their decisions.
 
ChuckBerry said:
The quran has not been cheapened and commercialized in any culture that I am aware of.
Click to expand...

Have you been to Mecca? Medina? Chances are pretty good that you have not. So you really can't make that statement with any real credibility can you?

And given that Serranos has a Christian background, not a Muslim one, it would make little sense for him to comment on that which he does not know.
Click to expand...

Oh Please! are you really trying to say that his offensive photo was done because he understands Christianity? And if he were Muslim, he would have possibly offended Islam in the same manner? Do us a favor, and don't insult our intelligence please.

I think people need to stop dragging their politics in to this. Even though its presidential election season, not EVERYTHING is about politics.
Click to expand...

Then you better look to Obama, and the liberal, progressive left first and foremost. It is Obama's foreign policy that is melting down in front of our eyes. It is Obama that is bullying the Christian faiths forcing them to provide things against their religious tenants. For liberal progressives, and Obama, everything is political, and in bounds.
 
j-mac said:
Have you been to Mecca? Medina? Chances are pretty good that you have not. So you really can't make that statement with any real credibility can you?

Oh Please! are you really trying to say that his offensive photo was done because he understands Christianity? And if he were Muslim, he would have possibly offended Islam in the same manner? Do us a favor, and don't insult our intelligence please.
Click to expand...

Have you ever met Serano do you know anything about him? Do you know anything about art?





Then you better look to Obama, and the liberal, progressive left first and foremost. It is Obama's foreign policy that is melting down in front of our eyes. It is Obama that is bullying the Christian faiths forcing them to provide things against their religious tenants. For liberal progressives, and Obama, everything is political, and in bounds.
Click to expand...

The pill law applies to Muslim organizations as well.
 
winston53660 said:
Have you ever met Serano
Click to expand...

Do you really think that is relevant to forming an opinion of his art? I suppose it could create a bias in the person who meets the celebrity, but otherwise?
 
ecofarm said:
Do you really think that is relevant to forming an opinion of his art? I suppose it could create a bias in the person who meets the celebrity, but otherwise?
Click to expand...

Is going to Mecca relavent like j=mac brought up?
 
ecofarm said:
I think he was pointing out the fallacy 'argumentum ad I been thereum'.
Click to expand...

That is what I was doing.

BTW I studied art at that in NYC at the time this controversy was hot. And like I said the image itself (the studium) is nothing that great. It is all the baggage that comes with it that gives it its punctum.
 
winston53660 said:
And like I said the image itself (the studium) is nothing that great. It is all the baggage that comes with it that gives it its punctum.
Click to expand...

Which makes it different than some stupid movie how?
 
winston53660 said:
Have you ever met Serano do you know anything about him?
Click to expand...

So I must know an artist personally to appreciate their art? I didn't know Monet either, but I enjoy his art...Did you know Monet?

Do you know anything about art?
Click to expand...

Oh, another false premise...Now I must be an expert to appreciate art? How silly.

The pill law applies to Muslim organizations as well.
Click to expand...

"...Never mind that Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and Muslims might find various forms of contraception and abortion-inducing drugs immoral or contrary to deeply-held religious beliefs, the federal government announced that it will provide exemptions from this mandate in perhaps the narrowest way possible. It will only give "religious institutions" an exemption if their primary purpose is to "inculcate religious values" and not act merely as a social service or community outreach program."

The Birth Control Mandate is Unconstitutional

So Muslims are in favor of it are they? Please show me.
 
ecofarm said:
Which makes it different than some stupid movie how?
Click to expand...

Because it raises critical thought about how we interact with religion.

The stupid mocie was just meant to demean Muslims.
 
j-mac said:
So I must know an artist personally to appreciate their art? I didn't know Monet either, but I enjoy his art...Did you know Monet?



Oh, another false premise...Now I must be an expert to appreciate art? How silly.



"...Never mind that Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and Muslims might find various forms of contraception and abortion-inducing drugs immoral or contrary to deeply-held religious beliefs, the federal government announced that it will provide exemptions from this mandate in perhaps the narrowest way possible. It will only give "religious institutions" an exemption if their primary purpose is to "inculcate religious values" and not act merely as a social service or community outreach program."

The Birth Control Mandate is Unconstitutional

So Muslims are in favor of it are they? Please show me.
Click to expand...

There is no birth control mandate.. What hysteria.

BTW, Muslims used birth control.. Heck, they may have invented it.
 
winston53660 said:
Is going to Mecca relavent like j=mac brought up?
Click to expand...

You miss the point, Chuck was offering his opinion with authority, in order to do that one would think you'd have to have more than just an ideological pre disposition to favor Islam over Christianity.
 
j-mac said:
So I must know an artist personally to appreciate their art? I didn't know Monet either, but I enjoy his art...Did you know Monet?



Oh, another false premise...Now I must be an expert to appreciate art? How silly.



"...Never mind that Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and Muslims might find various forms of contraception and abortion-inducing drugs immoral or contrary to deeply-held religious beliefs, the federal government announced that it will provide exemptions from this mandate in perhaps the narrowest way possible. It will only give "religious institutions" an exemption if their primary purpose is to "inculcate religious values" and not act merely as a social service or community outreach program."

The Birth Control Mandate is Unconstitutional

So Muslims are in favor of it are they? Please show me.
Click to expand...
Wow you really dove off the cliff to a conclusion there. I never said they were in favor of the pill law. I said it applies to them too.
 
sharon said:
There is no birth control mandate..
Click to expand...

Oh?

"Last month, HHS finalized a rule under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – more commonly known as ObamaCare – that will require most health insurance plans to cover all FDA-approved contraceptive and sterilization services without charging a co-pay, co-insurance or a deductible.1 Because the FDA has approved "contraceptive" or "morning-after" drugs like Plan B, Next Choice, and Ella, federal regulations will soon require virtually all employer-provided health insurance plans to pay for contraception, sterilization procedures, and early abortifacients. Religious and pro-life organizations are understandably alarmed by this ill-conceived measure."

The Birth Control Mandate is Unconstitutional

You are either terribly misinformed, or just plain lying....I'll for the moment assume the prior.
 
j-mac said:
You miss the point, Chuck was offering his opinion with authority, in order to do that one would think you'd have to have more than just an ideological pre disposition to favor Islam over Christianity.
Click to expand...

And your not offering your opinion as an authority?
 
winston53660 said:
Because it raises critical thought about how we interact with religion.

The stupid mocie was just meant to demean Muslims.
Click to expand...

The movie raised critical thought about how we interact with religion.

The stupid picture was just meant to demean Christians.



See how BS personal interpretation based on ones personal agenda works?
 
winston53660 said:
Wow you really dove off the cliff to a conclusion there. I never said they were in favor of the pill law. I said it applies to them too.
Click to expand...

Well, bravo to you then...What was your larger point in vocalizing that little tid bit?
 
j-mac said:
Oh?

"Last month, HHS finalized a rule under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – more commonly known as ObamaCare – that will require most health insurance plans to cover all FDA-approved contraceptive and sterilization services without charging a co-pay, co-insurance or a deductible.1 Because the FDA has approved "contraceptive" or "morning-after" drugs like Plan B, Next Choice, and Ella, federal regulations will soon require virtually all employer-provided health insurance plans to pay for contraception, sterilization procedures, and early abortifacients. Religious and pro-life organizations are understandably alarmed by this ill-conceived measure."

The Birth Control Mandate is Unconstitutional

You are either terribly misinformed, or just plain lying....I'll for the moment assume the prior.
Click to expand...

All it means is that employees of Catholic hospitals have healthcare insurance options like everyone else.

Don't you hate liars like this clot Horace Cooper?
 
j-mac said:
And how do they achieve that?
Click to expand...

Do you think all staff at Catholic hospitals are Catholic?

There are Catholics who work at University Hospitals and Corporate Hospitals who are NOT forced to use birth control..
 
sharon said:
Do you think all staff at Catholic hospitals are Catholic?
Click to expand...

No not necessarily, however if they take the job to work for that institution, then they know up front that this is a tenant of the institution, and therefore if they take the job anyway, then that is on them... Unless ofcourse you are one that feels that once a job is accepted that you own it, and can force a change in benefits through tyranny of the minority?

There are Catholics who work at University Hospitals and Corporate Hospitals who are NOT forced to use birth control..
Click to expand...

False equivalency. We are not talking about a hospital forcing someone to use something, we are talking about a religious based institution being forced to offer something against their faith.
 
j-mac said:
No not necessarily, however if they take the job to work for that institution, then they know up front that this is a tenant of the institution, and therefore if they take the job anyway, then that is on them... Unless ofcourse you are one that feels that once a job is accepted that you own it, and can force a change in benefits through tyranny of the minority?



False equivalency. We are not talking about a hospital forcing someone to use something, we are talking about a religious based institution being forced to offer something against their faith.
Click to expand...

I don't know what to say.. except How bloody stupid.. Employees for Catholic hospitals don't have to abide by Catholic dogma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom