±«Óãtv

Actually i think the sculpture looks wonderful. I bet the artist is glad of the controversy, he's now an international name. In great demand after this Id say.

That's nothing. Anyone recall the controversy around 1999 over a painting of the Virgin Mary rendered in Elephant dung? This is not a joke.

Another point of view with an image of the famous painting;

And another;

I think the real reason for the anger was not the painting itself which is protected by the Constitution as freedom of speech, that was not in question, it was the fact that the Museum is funded with public money. Those who found it offensive were incensed by this fact. But after sueing in court, they found out there was nothing they could do about it.

What happened to my posting about the painting "Sensation?" Lost in cyberspace at ±«Óãtv????

Here's one of the three links I cited. This was about public funding, free speech was never in doubt, only taxpayer support of it.

Now the posting which WAS there is gone. William, I think your server has gone haywire again. Hello, Mumbai, this is Belfast calling, could you send over........make that ASAP, on the next plane out if possible.

Now the posting which WAS there is gone. William, I think your server has gone haywire again. Hello, Mumbai, this is Belfast calling, could you send over........make that ASAP, on the next plane out if possible.

Here's the link about the award winning photograph of a cricifix with Jesus in a bottle of the artist's urine. It was in the message which disappeared...unless it was removed.

The link explains the conrtoversy over public funding for it. Like the painting "sensation" free speech was not an issue, only who pays for it.

Interesting. I'm quite sure the artist has a penchant for controversy - that could be the driving force, actually. Nothing wrong with that of course, but it doesn't make the sculpture meritorious just because it's 'art'. I don't find it offensive, but it's strange, a little creepy, and seems like a waste of good chocolate to me.

(That said, it's captured attention, and that makes it at least commercial; and secondly, it's intricate and lifelike - a little too lifelike for me. We could probably have done without the chocolate penis ... reminds me of a cheesy novelty gift.)

This sort of thing is bounty happen, though the artist does seem a bit flake-y...

Ok I'll get my coat...

After watching the ±«Óãtv Newsnight report the other evening which showed that children are still being used to harvest cocoa in Ivory Coast and that the price received by cocoa farmers has not changed in 30 years, my concern is whether the chocolate used for this sculpture is of the 'fairly traded' sort. (Although the use of unfairly traded chocolate would in itself be a metaphor for something - that's the great thing about art!)

We're trying to do without chocolate Easter eggs in our house this year - cue cries of complaint from our kids - I just don't think I could stomach it.

Looks like the exhibition has been canceled.

So much for liberal democracy!

Wow, what a great place the states is eh mark?

GD
On the bright side, at least there were no shootings or bombings over it.

No, no david koresh this time...

There's another piece of American history you evidently don't know. The nut cult Branch Davidians poured the accelerant and started the fire themselves. (You'll never take us alive copper.) They were holed up in a house in Waco Texas with an enormous arsenal of weapons. ATF and the FBI had the house surrounded for well over a month but rather than surrender they committed mass suicide. I wouldn't believe one word of their survivors own account if they swore to it on a stack of bibles. My only criticism...why did't the FBI assault the house a lot sooner. That was one time Janet Reno showed far too much restraint. Koresh was the wacko from waco.

And on the lighter side but in particularly bad taste so be warned that you could find this offensive;

We get a lot of nut cults like this in America. There was Jerry Jones who went to Guyana with his gang of followers and they committed mass suicide with cyanide laced kool aid. Recenty there was the bunch who committed mass suicide to join their spirits with space aliens or something. Usually nothing so mundane as bomb throwing or shootings, that's reserved for more ordinary criminals...and Islamic militants :-)

Uhh, posts 11 and 12... this is the perfect example of a liberal democracy. No rights were infringed, no freedoms were walked over and nobody's hand was forced by coercion whatever: see my short peice on the story for more on the reasons I say that.

What would you have changed? Would you have forced the hotel to keep the sculpture even though they were losing business because of it? Would you have forced the Catholic League to shut up, in an infringement of their right to free speech?

It's a disgrace that this art exhibition has been cancelled. It's an attack on free speech. When Christians demand freedom of religious expression across the world, they should give the same freedom to others.

kel #17
Since when have Christians NOT been hypocrites? Let he who is without sin....

What do you think? Does this look like a sacrilegious exhibition or a beautiful sculture provoking profound questions?

I think the problem with a lot of modern art is that people, like me, dont understand it. I dont think he can realisticaly expect the general public to engage with it on the level he wants. so its impact is mainly sensationalist.

to me its just chocolate

as far as it being offensive, most people gobbel the odd easter egg without worrying about the theological implications! why not lick a chocolate jesus?

mabey god is more offended at the large hole we are all making in the o-zone layer

What do you think? Does this look like a sacrilegious exhibition or a beautiful sculture provoking profound questions?

I think the problem with a lot of modern art is that people, like me, dont understand it. I dont think he can realisticaly expect the general public to engage with it on the level he wants. so its impact is mainly sensationalist.

to me its just chocolate

as far as it being offensive, most people gobbel the odd easter egg without worrying about the theological implications! why not lick a chocolate jesus?

mabey god is more offended at the large hole we are all making in the o-zone layer

What do you think? Does this look like a sacrilegious exhibition or a beautiful sculture provoking profound questions?

I think the problem with a lot of modern art is that people, like me, dont understand it. I dont think he can realisticaly expect the general public to engage with it on the level he wants. so its impact is mainly sensationalist.

to me its just chocolate

as far as being offensive, most people gobbel the odd easter egg without worrying about the theological implications! why not lick a chocolate jesus?

mabey god is more offended at the large hole we are all making in the o-zone layer

It's truly amazing how sanctimonious you leftist hypocrites are. First of all, you wrote the book on feigning offense for the purposes of effecting social change. How about all the school teams in the US that have had to relinquish their Indian mascots and names because some people might be offended? How about all the hate speech laws that are based on the notion that certain terms are "offensive"? How about the fact that every time someone utters a politically incorrect belief you hypocrites scream "I'm offended!"? And now you have the nerve to complain when Christians protest a sacrilegious piece of trash? You're so blind to your own contradictions, as you play the innocents and complain about how people have no right to be offended by your offensiveness.

Then, you talk about freedom of speech; well, I might mention the fact that an exhibit isn't speech, and just because some adventurist social engineers on our (the US') Supreme Court said it does changes that fact not a whit.

Lastly, if you were so concerned about free speech, where were you when the statist scum in your nations enacted hate speech laws?

I hope the Muslims conquer you. It would be a fitting punishment.

In the interests of free speech - for Judas

The recently unearthed Gospel of Judas "contradicts everything we know about Christianity," says religious historian Elaine Pagels.

By Steve Paulson

This is nothing but sheer popery! It breaches the second commandment and no doubt most of the ecumenical protestant clergymen will be delighted with this blasphemous, idolatrous image! Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them

Steve
This commandment is irrelevent atheists and you do not have a right not to be offended - don't look at it our turn off the switch!
We could be offended over the years by the relgious damming us to hell for our unbelief but have had to take it!!

Steve- It's called living in a free society. Since when did you arrogate to yourself the right to ban things you dislike for one reason or another? Can others therefore ban your church because they dislike it? Nobody's forcing you to look at the sculpture or to even acknowledge its existence.

Grow up and learn to live in a free society where everyone is different.