And now, some new fucktardry.
Sep. 3rd, 2008 10:45 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
clappamungusSometimes, I wonder if people can read.
Gallery sued over 'Jesus with erection'
September 3, 2008, 5:46 am
An art gallery in Britain which exhibited a statue of Jesus Christ with an erection has been taken to court by a devout Christian who says she is offended by the work and argued that the gallery would "not have dared" to portray Mohammed, let alone in that way.
The artwork was part of an exhibition at Baltic Centre for Contemporary Art in Gateshead, near the northeastern city of Newcastle, which featured dozens of plaster figures including Mickey Mouse, ET, and Jesus - all with erections.
The items were shown in a presentation a year ago of works by controversial Chinese artist Terence Koh.
Signs warning of the exhibition's content were posted at the entrance to the gallery, which was sued at Gateshead Magistrates Court for a breach of Section 5 of the Public Order Act and offending public decency.
Lawyers for Emily Mapfuwa, a 40-year-old Christian who said she was offended by the artwork, prosecuted the gallery for outraging public decency and causing harassment alarm and distress to the public.
Mapfuwa argued that, given the public sensitivities over the issue, the gallery would not have dared to depict Mohammed, let alone in such a way.
Mapfuwa said she believed in freedom of expression, but was of the opinion that "this statue served no other purpose than to offend Christians and to denigrate Christ."
The maximum penalty would be six months in prison and a fine of 5,000 pounds ($A10,596).
However, opening procedures faltered on a legal technicality Tuesday and the case was adjourned until September 23.
Yes, ok, it offended your Christian sensibilities. Yes, it was immature subject matter. However, there was a warning sign outside the gallery. If you're offended by Jesus with a cock, why did you go and see the exhibition? Other people don't share your offense. And, actually, there have been artworks (of a sort) that depicted Mohammed in an unflattering light. That isn't the fucking issue here. Why do these dopey God-botherers decide that it's a pissing contest between artists and their ability to take the mickey out of various religions??? I actually doubt if this artist's aim was to piss off Christians specifically - I just think he's obsessed with erect penises. Note that he also put them on Mickey Mouse. Do you see Disney suing Koh? No. So get some perspective, you fucking twat.
Maybe I should sue all the Creationist museums for offending my sense of sanity. Yes, I know these two are not (necessarily) linked, but my mind works on tangents like that.
EDIT As a sign of how annoyed I am about this, I've had to edit this post about five times due to typos and layout mess-ups.
Gallery sued over 'Jesus with erection'
September 3, 2008, 5:46 am
An art gallery in Britain which exhibited a statue of Jesus Christ with an erection has been taken to court by a devout Christian who says she is offended by the work and argued that the gallery would "not have dared" to portray Mohammed, let alone in that way.
The artwork was part of an exhibition at Baltic Centre for Contemporary Art in Gateshead, near the northeastern city of Newcastle, which featured dozens of plaster figures including Mickey Mouse, ET, and Jesus - all with erections.
The items were shown in a presentation a year ago of works by controversial Chinese artist Terence Koh.
Signs warning of the exhibition's content were posted at the entrance to the gallery, which was sued at Gateshead Magistrates Court for a breach of Section 5 of the Public Order Act and offending public decency.
Lawyers for Emily Mapfuwa, a 40-year-old Christian who said she was offended by the artwork, prosecuted the gallery for outraging public decency and causing harassment alarm and distress to the public.
Mapfuwa argued that, given the public sensitivities over the issue, the gallery would not have dared to depict Mohammed, let alone in such a way.
Mapfuwa said she believed in freedom of expression, but was of the opinion that "this statue served no other purpose than to offend Christians and to denigrate Christ."
The maximum penalty would be six months in prison and a fine of 5,000 pounds ($A10,596).
However, opening procedures faltered on a legal technicality Tuesday and the case was adjourned until September 23.
Yes, ok, it offended your Christian sensibilities. Yes, it was immature subject matter. However, there was a warning sign outside the gallery. If you're offended by Jesus with a cock, why did you go and see the exhibition? Other people don't share your offense. And, actually, there have been artworks (of a sort) that depicted Mohammed in an unflattering light. That isn't the fucking issue here. Why do these dopey God-botherers decide that it's a pissing contest between artists and their ability to take the mickey out of various religions??? I actually doubt if this artist's aim was to piss off Christians specifically - I just think he's obsessed with erect penises. Note that he also put them on Mickey Mouse. Do you see Disney suing Koh? No. So get some perspective, you fucking twat.
Maybe I should sue all the Creationist museums for offending my sense of sanity. Yes, I know these two are not (necessarily) linked, but my mind works on tangents like that.
EDIT As a sign of how annoyed I am about this, I've had to edit this post about five times due to typos and layout mess-ups.
